On 10/19/2015 12:47 PM, Martin Basti wrote:
On 16.10.2015 12:36, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 16.10.2015 10:31, Martin Basti wrote:
On 16.10.2015 10:05, Martin Babinsky wrote:
On 10/16/2015 08:47 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 16.10.2015 08:42, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 10/16/2015 06:00 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 15.10.2015 19:47, Martin Basti wrote:
On 15.10.2015 18:47, Martin Basti wrote:
On 15.10.2015 18:36, Martin Babinsky wrote:
On 10/15/2015 04:50 PM, Martin Basti wrote:
On 14.10.2015 16:10, Martin Basti wrote:
On 14.10.2015 15:51, Martin Babinsky wrote:
On 10/13/2015 06:38 PM, Martin Basti wrote:
On 12.10.2015 12:30, Martin Babinsky wrote:
On 10/08/2015 05:58 PM, Martin Basti wrote:
The attached patches fix following tickets:
With these patches, an administrator can specify LDIF file
modifications to be applied to dse.ldif right after
Functionally the paches work as expected. However I have
in patch 318:
1.) there is a typo in ModifyLDIF class docstring:
+ Operations keep the order in whihc were specified
in patch 320:
1.) you should use 'os.path.join' to construct FS paths:
- dse_filename = '%s/%s' % (
+ dse_filename = os.path.join(
2.) IIUC the 'config_ldif_file' knob in BaseServer holds the
LDIF containing the mod operations to dse.ldif. However, the
sounds like the option accepts the path of dse.ldif
to rename the knob to something more in-line with the
function, like 'dse_mods_file'.
Updated patches + CI test attached
Patches work as expected and CI tests are OK.
However it seems that warning level messages are not logged to
installer output but only to log file (*waves hand* magic).
Maybe it would be a good idea to raise the message level to
so that it is immediately obvious to the user that his DSE
contain an error and cannot be parsed.
Also you have a typo in the commit message of patch 320
Updated patches attached.
Rebased patches for master branch.
Pushed to master: 5233165ce7062bb7aa649bf95a029103c375207b
Pushed to ipa-4-2: 94412b81c1c09b56ee2900942a1b804f21c264c5
These tickets are not for ipa-4-2,
Can we use a better option name? --dirsrv-config-mods sounds weird,
as you need
to specify a file, not mods...
+1. maybe --dirsrv-config-ldif?
--dirsrv-config-file is most consistent with other options which
files (--external-cert-file, --ca-cert-file, --kasp-db-file, etc.)
This, however, may be confusing to user since '--dirsrv-config-file'
may evoke a feeling that it consumes *whole new* dse.ldif while in
reality it is only a few custom mods to directory server configuration.
I agree, it expects only file containing modifications in LDIF format,
'config-file' suffix may be confusing
Sorry, but this does not make any sense. Why would anyone think they
are supposed to specify a complete dse.ldif? Is it written somewhere
that DS config file == dse.ldif? I don't think so. And, if you use
--help, you will see exactly what the option does right away.
What is actually confusing is inventing a "smart" name instead of
making it consistent with everything else.
Speaking about the option, I saw some unescaped
"-"'s in the man page updates:
+The path to LDIF file that will be used to modify configuration of
during installation of the directory server instance
Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-devel mailing list:
Contribute to FreeIPA: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Contribute/Code