[SSSD] [PATCH] Remove generated manpages when performing make clean

2010-09-09 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Fixes https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/614 - -- Stephen Gallagher RHCE 804006346421761 Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] Save all data to sysdb in one transaction

2010-09-09 Thread Sumit Bose
On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 09:52:31AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/08/2010 09:50 AM, Sumit Bose wrote: On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 09:33:04AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: On 07/08/2010 12:57 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: Just a reminder

[SSSD] [PATCH] Fix parameter order when initializing decryption

2010-09-09 Thread Jakub Hrozek
I made a stupid error in the decryption code which caused the decryption to fail on i686. Sumit found the bug out and the attached patch fixes it. From d5934e29143db5d772da720b6789324dad9a05b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jakub Hrozek jhro...@redhat.com Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 15:06:21 +0200

[SSSD] Behaviour of getgrnam/getgrgid

2010-09-09 Thread Ralf Haferkamp
Hi, Is it really the intended behaviour of the sssd LDAP backend (I am running the current code from the master branch) to only return the group members that are already cached in sysdb and to silently ignore everything else? E.g. when I start sssd with empty caches and do a getent group

Re: [SSSD] Behaviour of getgrnam/getgrgid

2010-09-09 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/09/2010 09:14 AM, Ralf Haferkamp wrote: Hi, Is it really the intended behaviour of the sssd LDAP backend (I am running the current code from the master branch) to only return the group members that are already cached in sysdb and to

Re: [SSSD] Behaviour of getgrnam/getgrgid

2010-09-09 Thread Simo Sorce
On Thu, 09 Sep 2010 09:18:12 -0400 Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/09/2010 09:14 AM, Ralf Haferkamp wrote: Hi, Is it really the intended behaviour of the sssd LDAP backend (I am running the current code from the

Re: [SSSD] Behaviour of getgrnam/getgrgid

2010-09-09 Thread Ralf Haferkamp
On Thursday 09 September 2010 15:59:46 Simo Sorce wrote: On Thu, 09 Sep 2010 09:18:12 -0400 Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/09/2010 09:14 AM, Ralf Haferkamp wrote: Hi, Is it really the intended behaviour of the

Re: [SSSD] Behaviour of getgrnam/getgrgid

2010-09-09 Thread Simo Sorce
On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 16:46:35 +0200 Ralf Haferkamp rha...@suse.de wrote: On Thursday 09 September 2010 15:59:46 Simo Sorce wrote: On Thu, 09 Sep 2010 09:18:12 -0400 Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/09/2010 09:14

Re: [SSSD] Behaviour of getgrnam/getgrgid

2010-09-09 Thread Jeff Schroeder
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Simo Sorce sso...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 16:46:35 +0200 Ralf Haferkamp rha...@suse.de wrote: On Thursday 09 September 2010 15:59:46 Simo Sorce wrote: On Thu, 09 Sep 2010 09:18:12 -0400 Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote:

Re: [SSSD] Behaviour of getgrnam/getgrgid

2010-09-09 Thread Simo Sorce
On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 08:57:37 -0700 Jeff Schroeder jeffschroe...@computer.org wrote: On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Simo Sorce sso...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 16:46:35 +0200 Ralf Haferkamp rha...@suse.de wrote: On Thursday 09 September 2010 15:59:46 Simo Sorce wrote: On

Re: [SSSD] Netgroups in SSSD

2010-09-09 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/08/2010 09:04 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: I've also been thinking about how we're going to handle processing the nested groups, and I think what I'm going to do is take advantage of some of the nicer features of libcollection. Internal