On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Lukas Slebodnik <lsleb...@redhat.com> wrote: > On (08/02/17 12:24), Fabiano Fidêncio wrote: >>On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Lukas Slebodnik <lsleb...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> On (05/02/17 23:24), Fabiano Fidêncio wrote: >>>>I've spent some amount of time trying to properly deal with this issue >>>>and I really need the opinion/suggestion of more experienced >>>>developers. >>>> >>>>Basically, as explained in #3300 this situation can happen is two >>>>scenarios were the admin is mixing up socket-activated and explicitly >>>>configured services: >>>>- Scenario 1: >>>> - nss responder is explicitly activated; >>>> - nss responder's socket is enabled; >>>> - boot the system >>>> - both nss processes will be up >>>> >>> This is pure misconfuguration and I do not think a reason why we shoudl >>> solve >>> it. >> >>Do you prefer to not deal with a misconfiguration scneraio (that may >>not be caused by the admins themselves, but by the packager ...) even >>if we can do that? >>Interesting, at least. >> > Yes, I do not want to deal with misconfiguration. > We might passively detect it and refuse such state. > e.g. Fail if unix sockets are already created(by systemd) and monitor > wants to start responders. > >>> >>>>So, what I've thought so far, for each of the scenarios, is: >>>>- Scenario 1: >>>> Implement a way to either bypass the monitor in case the responder's >>>>socket it up or do not start the process through systemd in case one >>>>instance of the process is already being ran by the monitor. The main >>>>question here is how to do this without adding more logic to the >>>>monitor >>> What is a goal here? >> >>The goal here is be bulletproof against wrong configurations/admins >>trying to do something they're not supposed to. >>But, as far as I understand from your previous comment, it's not of >>your (and thus the project) interest to be robust on these cases. >> > I am not against to be robust. I am against magical workarounding > such misconfuguration.
I do not understand why do you think using systemd when we can using systemd is a magical workaroud. > > LS > _______________________________________________ > sssd-devel mailing list -- sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org > To unsubscribe send an email to sssd-devel-le...@lists.fedorahosted.org _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list -- sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org To unsubscribe send an email to sssd-devel-le...@lists.fedorahosted.org
