Tomas Babej wrote:
When executing ipa-replica-manage connect to an unknown or irrelevant
master, we now print a sensible error message informing the user
about this possiblity as well.
I put a whole bunch of code into a try/except and this may be catching
errors in unexpected ways.
I'm not entirely sure right now what we should do, but looking at the
code in the try:
We take in replica1 and replica1 as arguments (the default for replica1
is the current host).
If either of these raise a NotFound it means there there is no master of
that name. Does that mean that the master was deleted? Well, clearly not.
A lot has changed since I did this, I may have been relying on a
side-effect, or just hadn't tested well-enough.
I wonder if we need that message at all. Is "foo" is not an IPA server
good enough? It still might be confusing if someone didn't know that
"foo" was deleted and it was still running. We could probably verify
that it is at least an IPA server by doing similar checking in the
client, it all depends on how far we want to take it.
Freeipa-devel mailing list