On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 08:38 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> I guess SSSD cache is probably the reason why you still have the old GID. Try
> running sss_cache -G to invalidate all groups and if you have queried SSSD
> for
> that group in last few minutes, wait for the client in-memory cache to expire
> I'll start out by saying that I don't know if sssd is the culprit in my
> problem or not; but if not, I hope someone here with more knowledge of
> the moving parts at play can point me in the right direction.
>
> I have two machines: one with Fedora 16 and one with the Fedora 17
> prerelease. I
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1172
From: sgall...@redhat.com
To: sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 13:05:42 -0400
Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] Bad check for id_provider=local and
access_provider=permit
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 11:56 -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
> Thanks
I'll start out by saying that I don't know if sssd is the culprit in my
problem or not; but if not, I hope someone here with more knowledge of
the moving parts at play can point me in the right direction.
I have two machines: one with Fedora 16 and one with the Fedora 17
prerelease. I had initial
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 14:44 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 20:36 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > This is the last bug that was reported by clang and not Coverity. Some
> > of those that clang reported are also reported by Coverity and have
> > their own tickets (#1330-#1333)
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 14:44 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 19:30 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > This is a ressurrection of a very old thread
> > https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/sssd-devel/2011-July/006493.html
> >
> > Compared to what Honza suggested, I'm not checking t
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 20:36 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> This is the last bug that was reported by clang and not Coverity. Some
> of those that clang reported are also reported by Coverity and have
> their own tickets (#1330-#1333).
>
> I missed it in the first run because there was the same bug e
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 19:30 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> This is a ressurrection of a very old thread
> https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/sssd-devel/2011-July/006493.html
>
> Compared to what Honza suggested, I'm not checking the reserverd space.
> I don't think we should be babysitting the admin
This is the last bug that was reported by clang and not Coverity. Some
of those that clang reported are also reported by Coverity and have
their own tickets (#1330-#1333).
I missed it in the first run because there was the same bug elsewhere in
the same file, I just didn't realize clang was report
This is a ressurrection of a very old thread
https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/sssd-devel/2011-July/006493.html
Compared to what Honza suggested, I'm not checking the reserverd space.
I don't think we should be babysitting the admin that much - if he wants
to use a reserved address, let him. The
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 11:56 -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
> Thanks for explanation :).
> Something like that?
>
> tmp =
> ldb_msg_find_attr_as_string(res->msgs[0],CONFDB_DOMAIN_ACCESS_PROVIDER,NULL);
> if (tmp && strcasecmp(tmp, "permit") != 0) {
> ...
>
> And doc
Thanks for explanation :).
Something like that?
tmp =
ldb_msg_find_attr_as_string(res->msgs[0],CONFDB_DOMAIN_ACCESS_PROVIDER,NULL);
if (tmp && strcasecmp(tmp, "permit") != 0) {
...
And documentatión
access_provider (string)
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 17:07 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 07:35:01AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 11:15 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 07:19:29PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 22:20 +0200,
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 07:36 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 12:54 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:51:02PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > New patch with this fix is attached.
> >
> > Now it is.
>
> Ack.
Pushed to master.
signature.asc
Descript
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 10:42 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 14:51 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1329
>
> Ack.
>
> Man, I can't believe I did that. I guess it's fortunate that the LDAP
> provider doesn't actually do anything when it rec
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 07:35:01AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 11:15 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 07:19:29PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 22:20 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Nack, the way ldap_get_dn
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 14:51 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1329
Ack.
Man, I can't believe I did that. I guess it's fortunate that the LDAP
provider doesn't actually do anything when it receives a get[pw|gr]ent
request. So this only actually affects the proxy pro
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1329
>From 293998dc6446609ca6775227641683ee2e6bd094 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jakub Hrozek
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 13:09:05 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Send the correct enumeration request
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1329
---
src/responder/nss/nsssrv_
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 12:54 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:51:02PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > New patch with this fix is attached.
>
> Now it is.
Ack.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:51:02PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> New patch with this fix is attached.
Now it is.
>From 565ea17157db42af53d06d461a1e4cd916a2c249 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jakub Hrozek
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 14:14:07 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] subdomains: Fix error handling in Data P
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 07:39:46PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 00:13 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > To test, trigger any NSS operation with SSSD configured with a domain
> > that can't yield subdomains. The current git HEAD returns an error when
> > parsing the message r
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 01:01:44AM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
>apologize for the patch file name :D
>
>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1172
Hi Ariel,
thank you very much for the patch! The naming and formatting of the patch
is fine.
This approach would remove the startup error as d
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 07:19:29PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 22:20 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >
> > Nack, the way ldap_get_dn is used leaks memory:
> >
> > +DEBUG(SSSDBG_TRACE_INTERNAL,
> > + ("Matched objectclass [%s] on DN [%s
23 matches
Mail list logo
