On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 10:58:00AM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > This patch should fix a segfault in failover code introduced by my > recent hostname expiration patch. > > I didn't realize that when using SRV records, server->common == NULL is > legal as we don't have the server name resolved yet. > > The first hunk in the patch is completely unrelated to the crash. But I > think it is correct, server->common == NULL should never mean that the > server is resolved. Should I split the hunk (at least for stable > branches sake) even if it is one-liner?
ACK bye, Sumit > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAk10rCgACgkQHsardTLnvCV7AwCcD3S6hlJIMnF3xxxtkaON/2Gr > IkQAn0ZFtnsyH+YOBBuM7SmwmfAV+o0P > =V/Kz > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel