On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 12:48 +0200, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
>
> > Let's identify it and get it filed.
> >
> > Can you paste the relevant part of your config file? Feel free to
> > sanitize sensitive parts like hostnames, etc. What is the desired order
> > of resolving? SRV first, then hardcoded hos
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 05:38:11PM +0200, Sumit Bose wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 04:48:32PM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 04:58:05PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:15:31PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 04:48:32PM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 04:58:05PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:15:31PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/924 started as a segfault ticket
> > > > but we could never
On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 13:47 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In light of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726467 I have been
> thinking about improving how we handle DNS timeouts in general.
>
> Currently there is one timeout option we pass to c-ares. However, that option
> is per-
> Dne 17.8.2011 15:29, Jan Zelený napsal(a):
> >>> Patch #0006:
> >>> -please just for safety use parentheses in ternary
> >>> operator (line 92 and couple more similar)
> >>
> >> Done and also moved to macro.
> >
> > You still don't have parentheses around the condition in ternary
> > operat
Let's identify it and get it filed.
Can you paste the relevant part of your config file? Feel free to
sanitize sensitive parts like hostnames, etc. What is the desired order
of resolving? SRV first, then hardcoded host name?
Ok, I can not replicate the problem - my bad. However I have discove
On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 12:22 -0400, Dmitri Pal wrote:
> On 08/17/2011 05:03 AM, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
> > Hi list,
> >
> > Quick question - is anyone working on the automounter support yet? I
> > am just curious how it would be done.
Me too, at this stage.
> > I see only one ticket (#900) which
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/972
Requires "New DEBUG facility" patches.
>From c88774c748a4b3ecc9d539d6a745bb3ed7059257 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Pavel=20B=C5=99ezina?=
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 15:26:02 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] --debug-timestamps=1 is not passed to providers
h
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 04:58:05PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:15:31PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/924 started as a segfault ticket
> > > but we could never reproduce the crash afterwards.
> > >
> > > As Sumit noted it might
Hi,
In light of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726467 I have been
thinking about improving how we handle DNS timeouts in general.
Currently there is one timeout option we pass to c-ares. However, that option
is per-nameserver. I guess that makes sense from a resolver library POV - as
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 04:58:05PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:15:31PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/924 started as a segfault ticket
> > but we could never reproduce the crash afterwards.
> >
> > As Sumit noted it might have been c
11 matches
Mail list logo