Hello sssd, this is Transifex at http://www.transifex.net.
The following attached files were submitted to SSSD | master by ruigo
Please, visit Transifex at http://www.transifex.net/projects/p/sssd/c/master/
in order to see the component page.
Thank you,
Transifex
# SOME DESCRIPTIVE TITLE.
#
Hello sssd, this is Transifex at http://www.transifex.net.
The following attached files were submitted to SSSD | Stable Branch (1.1.x) by
ruigo
Please, visit Transifex at http://www.transifex.net/projects/p/sssd/c/stable/
in order to see the component page.
Thank you,
Transifex
# SOME DESCRI
The System Security Services Daemon team is proud to announce the 1.1.91
release. This is our release candidate for the 1.2.0 release. As of this
time, we are feature-complete and in string freeze.
== Highlights ==
* Better support for FreeIPA v2
* Allow use of DNS SRV records for failover
On 05/07/2010 03:39 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 03:05:09PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 05/05/2010 04:13 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>> Sumit, can you give me some more information on how to test this?
>>>
>>> From what I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/07/2010 09:39 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 03:05:09PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On 05/05/2010 04:13 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
Sumit, can you give me some more information on how to test this?
From what I gathere
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/06/2010 07:54 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 05/05/2010 04:37 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
>> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 11:11:51PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 05/04/2010 08:54 PM, Stephen
On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 03:05:09PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 05/05/2010 04:13 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > Sumit, can you give me some more information on how to test this?
> >
> > From what I gathered, you should be asked for a password as
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 05/07/2010 11:17 AM, Eugene Indenbom wrote:
>
>> Oops, sorry about stray comment. I forgot that in recent changes retry
>> count check has been added.
>>
>
> No problem. It's not obvious from that code right there.
>
>> Yes, when we reach retry limit we should go offli
On 05/07/2010 11:17 AM, Eugene Indenbom wrote:
Oops, sorry about stray comment. I forgot that in recent changes retry
count check has been added.
No problem. It's not obvious from that code right there.
Yes, when we reach retry limit we should go offline.
In case of out of memory (or other
On 05/07/2010 11:23 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 11:00:34AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On 05/07/2010 09:34 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
Hi,
this patch should solve #470 by calling be_resolve_server_send() during
startup.
Nack. As discussed off-list, we need to write a kdcinf
On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 11:00:34AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 05/07/2010 09:34 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > this patch should solve #470 by calling be_resolve_server_send() during
> > startup.
> >
>
>
> Nack. As discussed off-list, we need to write a kdcinfo even when we're
>
On 05/07/2010 06:53 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 05/07/2010 10:51 AM, Eugene Indenbom wrote:
>
>> On 05/07/2010 06:43 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
>>
>>> Eugene Indenbom wrote:
>>>
>>>
One correction (not really important): an error in
sdap_account_info_restart(breq) shoul
On 05/07/2010 09:34 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this patch should solve #470 by calling be_resolve_server_send() during
> startup.
>
Nack. As discussed off-list, we need to write a kdcinfo even when we're
offline at startup, so that services trying to get service tickets will
receive "Canno
On 05/07/2010 10:51 AM, Eugene Indenbom wrote:
> On 05/07/2010 06:43 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
>> Eugene Indenbom wrote:
>>
>>> One correction (not really important): an error in
>>> sdap_account_info_restart(breq) should not put backend to offline:
>>>
>>>
>> If you do this way shouldn't you set the e
On 05/07/2010 06:43 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
> Eugene Indenbom wrote:
>
>> One correction (not really important): an error in
>> sdap_account_info_restart(breq) should not put backend to offline:
>>
>>
> If you do this way shouldn't you set the errstr too?
>
>
>
Sure, just could not thin
Eugene Indenbom wrote:
> One correction (not really important): an error in
> sdap_account_info_restart(breq) should not put backend to offline:
>
If you do this way shouldn't you set the errstr too?
> +static void sdap_account_info_common_done(int ret, struct be_req *breq,
> +
One correction (not really important): an error in
sdap_account_info_restart(breq) should not put backend to offline:
+static void sdap_account_info_common_done(int ret, struct be_req *breq,
+ const char *str_on_err)
+{
+struct sdap_id_ctx *ctx;
+i
On 05/07/2010 10:24 AM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On 05/06/2010 06:33 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
And then you do not need enum that looks a bit ugly here...
At least this gives the idea of what I mean...
I think I was overtired yesterday. The attached patch should be more
sane
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 05/06/2010 06:33 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
>
>>
>> And then you do not need enum that looks a bit ugly here...
>>
>> At least this gives the idea of what I mean...
>>
>
> I think I was overtired yesterday. The attached patch should be more
> sane.
>
This seems much better,
On 05/06/2010 06:33 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
And then you do not need enum that looks a bit ugly here...
At least this gives the idea of what I mean...
I think I was overtired yesterday. The attached patch should be more sane.
--
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761
Delivering value year a
Hi,
this patch should solve #470 by calling be_resolve_server_send() during
startup.
bye,
Sumit
From 0a61519bcb149b81d932c6f188d8c67be257d658 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sumit Bose
Date: Fri, 7 May 2010 15:28:21 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Create kdcinfo and kpasswdinfo file at startup
---
src/p
On 05/07/2010 05:03 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> As for this particular set of changes, I'm still going to resolve this
> particular issue in the way that Dmitri suggests for 1.2.0. That's
> because this is a segfault and needs to be eliminated before we can ship
> 1.2.0 (the preview tarball of w
On 05/07/2010 02:33 AM, Eugene Indenbom wrote:
> Dear Stephen and Dmitri,
>
> We are going in rounds. I have already addressed all this copy-paste
> hell in my patches concerning GSSAPI reconnect.
>
> I would appreciate very much if you look into my patches now and give me
> feedback. The patches c
On 05/07/2010 07:08 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 02:10:08PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> On 05/06/2010 09:25 AM, Sumit Bose wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 09:41:10AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On 05/05/2010 05:02 AM, Sumit Bose wrote
>
> rebased versio
On 05/07/2010 08:31 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>
> David did a manpage review for us (off-list) and had some very good
> suggestions. The attached patch contains the same code as the previous
> revision, just the documentation has been corrected.
Ack. (Verified with interdiff)
--
Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/05/2010 04:55 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 05/04/2010 01:28 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 05/04/2010 06:43 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
>>> ACK, but please add
>>> http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclu
On 05/07/2010 07:47 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> This was found by running our test suite with MALLOC_PERTURB_ on
Ack.
--
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761
Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
On 05/07/2010 07:56 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Petter Reinholdtsen pointed out that we do not include any contact
> information in our tarball. This patch adds a simple README file
> (inspired by the file FreeIPA carries)
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Petter Reinholdtsen pointed out that we do not include any contact
information in our tarball. This patch adds a simple README file
(inspired by the file FreeIPA carries)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using G
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This was found by running our test suite with MALLOC_PERTURB_ on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkvj/e4ACgkQHsardTLnvCVINQCeKAHaqpK2W7do8+SSOw
30 matches
Mail list logo
