On 04/09/2014 01:00 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 04/08/2014 11:23 AM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 04/08/2014 10:32 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Tue, 2014-04-08 at 09:54 -0400, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 04/07/2014 10:13 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 19:20 -0400, Dmitri Pal wrote:
Hello,
This is th
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 08:16:21PM +0200, steve wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 19:26 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >=== SSSD 1.11.5.1 ===
> >
> > The SSSD team is proud to announce the release of version 1.11.5.1 of
> > the System Security Services Daemon.
>
> Hi
> Tested o
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 08:19:55PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 05:29:35PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> > On (11/04/14 16:49), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > >On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:57:52PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> > >> Why separe patch?
> > >> generated files should
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 05:29:35PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (11/04/14 16:49), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:57:52PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >> Why separe patch?
> >> generated files should not in in tarball.
> >
> >Because a patch that fixes an issue important
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 19:26 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>=== SSSD 1.11.5.1 ===
>
> The SSSD team is proud to announce the release of version 1.11.5.1 of
> the System Security Services Daemon.
Hi
Tested on openSUSE 13.1 against a samba 4.1.6 DC.
All OK.
Thanks,
Steve
_
=== SSSD 1.11.5.1 ===
The SSSD team is proud to announce the release of version 1.11.5.1 of
the System Security Services Daemon.
As always, the source is available from https://fedorahosted.org/sssd
RPM packages will be made available for Fedora 19, 20 and rawhide shortly.
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 05:49:55PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 05:29:35PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> > On (11/04/14 16:49), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > >On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:57:52PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> > >> Why separe patch?
> > >> generated files should
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 05:29:35PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (11/04/14 16:49), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:57:52PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >> Why separe patch?
> >> generated files should not in in tarball.
> >
> >Because a patch that fixes an issue important
Hi Jakub,
Hopefully I’m providing a decent discussion starting point. Is placing the DC
into resolv.conf the typical scenario? Or is it more that this is the
Microsoft-recommended way of doing things, full stop?
For example, I don’t put 8.8.8.8 into my resolver if I want to lookup the
www.go
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 05:29:35PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (11/04/14 16:49), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:57:52PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >> Why separe patch?
> >> generated files should not in in tarball.
> >
> >Because a patch that fixes an issue important
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/11/2014 11:02 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this patch prints an error message in case a keytab is missing
> completely to avoid confusing admins as in the case on sssd-users
> today.
>
>
This is a pretty vital error; probably worth send
On (11/04/14 16:49), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:57:52PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> Why separe patch?
>> generated files should not in in tarball.
>
>Because a patch that fixes an issue important enough to trigger a release
>should be minimal. I would prefer to commit the
Hi,
this patch prints an error message in case a keytab is missing
completely to avoid confusing admins as in the case on sssd-users today.
>From 97b685c8a689d7ba6a9cfd6e5360ead9f28e91c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jakub Hrozek
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 16:56:55 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] KRB5: Print
Resolves:
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2304
I also renamed the create_order_array() function into
init_map_order_ctx. It seems to be more appropriate name
now.
Patch is attached.
Thanks,
Michal
>From ff161d5fe7496fcd4ca84ab337fde1c56b80af09 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michal Zidek
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:57:52PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> Why separe patch?
> generated files should not in in tarball.
Because a patch that fixes an issue important enough to trigger a release
should be minimal. I would prefer to commit the part that touches the systemd
service file in a
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 12:16 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 02:29:05PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > please see attached patch.
> >
> > This patch was previously written for BZ 1059423. But it now seems that
> > more detailed logging information is generally
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 12:23 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
[snip]
> > @@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ static int be_fo_get_options(struct be_ctx *ctx,
> >
> > DP_RES_OPT_RESOLVER_TIMEOUT);
> > opts->retry_timeout = 30;
> > opts->srv_retry_timeout = 14400;
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:11:40PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
> On 04/10/2014 04:20 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >our current HOWTO[1] on connecting SSSD to an AD DC is outdated,
> >mostly because the page still only introduces the LDAP provider. Recently,
> >me,
> >Sumit and Jeremy Agee
On (11/04/14 11:41), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 11:25:45AM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (11/04/14 00:42), Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> >ehlo,
>> >
>> >patches for master and 1-11 branchare attached.
>> >
>> >Resolves:
>> >https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2314
>> >
>> >how
On 04/10/2014 04:20 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
Hi,
our current HOWTO[1] on connecting SSSD to an AD DC is outdated,
mostly because the page still only introduces the LDAP provider. Recently, me,
Sumit and Jeremy Agee wrote a new page that specifically advises to use
the AD provider and also use rea
On 04/10/2014 11:03 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
The attached patch implements introspecting the sbus interfaces as
tracked by #2234.
There is one part of the patch I dislike, but I wanted to get other
opinions, too -- the discard_const in sbus_message_handler(). I was
going back and forth on whether
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 10:49:25AM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 19:44 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 06:45:02PM +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2014-02-10 at 16:04 +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > please see attached p
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 02:29:05PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> Hello,
>
> please see attached patch.
>
> This patch was previously written for BZ 1059423. But it now seems that
> more detailed logging information is generally useful for issues that
> are emerging from this area lately.
>
> Pa
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 05:47:33PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> Hello,
>
> please see attached patches.
>
> I'm not sure that the 2nd patch is needed to fulfill the ticket
> requirements. (https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2308)
>
> Pavel Reichl
>
>
> From 31e951439e1f2215adb64e4409c717ac
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 11:25:45AM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (11/04/14 00:42), Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >ehlo,
> >
> >patches for master and 1-11 branchare attached.
> >
> >Resolves:
> >https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2314
> >
> >how to test:
> >#generate tarball with "make distcheck"
On (11/04/14 00:42), Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>ehlo,
>
>patches for master and 1-11 branchare attached.
>
>Resolves:
>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2314
>
>how to test:
>#generate tarball with "make distcheck"
>#move tarball to another directory
>#extract tarball
>#change dir to sssd-$(VERSION
26 matches
Mail list logo
