On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 11:01 -0400, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> Martin Kosek wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 23:54 -0400, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> >> The has_upg() check was created during a transition period for 389-ds.
> >> It is no longer needed and is actually breaking things. The location of
> >> UPG template moved so it thinks the feature is not available. This is
> >> making the primary user's group ipausers instead of the UPG.
> >>
> >> rob
> >
> > Shouldn't we remove has_managed_entries() and its use too? After all, we
> > claim that this patch fixes #1242 which asks for has_managed_entries()
> > removal.
> >
> > Martin
> >
> 
> Updated patch attached. It removes has_managed_entries().
> 
> rob

Looks good - there is just some leftover in the bottom of commit
message, probably from patch squashing.

However, I was thinking about has_upg() removal. Shouldn't we check if
the UPG plugin is enabled (the same way we do in ipa-managed-entries)?
Otherwise if the plugin is disabled and we would run user-add command
without --noprivate option, we would set nonexistent GID for the user as
the UPG wouldn't be created.

Martin

_______________________________________________
Freeipa-devel mailing list
Freeipa-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel

Reply via email to