On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 02:58:17PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote: > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 05:34:44PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 05:02:07PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 10:09:58PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:05:16PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:03:11PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 12:04:44PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 10:18:32PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I found this bug when testing the GC patches. Previously, when > > > > > > > > SSSD was > > > > > > > > started, but subdomains list was up-to-date, the ad_ctx was not > > > > > > > > initialized for the subdomain. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was also thinking whether we should re-initialize the > > > > > > > > domain-realm > > > > > > > > mappings after sssd startup, the way we re-initialize kdcinfo > > > > > > > > files. I > > > > > > > > don't think it's strictly necessary because if someone deletes > > > > > > > > a file in > > > > > > > > /var/lib/sss/pubconf, he should keep the broken pieces, but > > > > > > > > perhaps we > > > > > > > > should be at least aware.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe we can do this during the init phase of the responder? We > > > > > > > > ah, sorry, I had the typo here ^^^^^^^^ first. > > > > I meant to call it during the initialization of the subdomain part of > > > > the AD and IPA providers. > > > > > > > > bye, > > > > Sumit > > > > > > That makes perfect sense :-) > > > > > > See the attached patch, I moved the code to a separate function. > > > > Actually, I did one more change in the original patch and also did a > > similar change in the IPA provider. The result is a second patch. I > > mostly split the patches into two because the IPA patch is a > > convenience, so from my point of view it's fine to fix it in master > > only. The first one is something I'd like in sssd-1-11, too. > > ACK to both. I do not see a reason why the IPA patch should not be > pushed to 1.11. > > bye, > Sumit
Thanks for the review, pushed to master and sssd-1-11 _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel