On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Martin Basti <mba...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > On 10.05.2016 14:42, Gabe Alford wrote: > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 6:26 AM, Martin Basti <mba...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On 10.05.2016 14:13, Gabe Alford wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 2:00 AM, Martin Basti < <mba...@redhat.com> >> mba...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 04.05.2016 15:14, Gabe Alford wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Abhijeet Kasurde < >>> <akasu...@redhat.com>akasu...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Gabe, >>>> >>>> I am wondering, how are we handling "CalledProcessError" exception ? >>>> >>> >>> I am not sure 100% what you are asking, but from what I understand, the >>> "CalledProcessError" exception is when a process returns a non-zero exit >>> status. >>> However when running 'ipa-nis-manage enable', an exception is never hit >>> even if portmap is not installed, hence portmap always being enabled. >>> >>> So it seems that if the process is not installed, "CalledProcessError" >>> doesn't catch an error. >>> >>> Gabe >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> portmap.enable() may raise the "CalledProcessError" in case that >>> systemct enable failed and we should catch this exception and handle it in >>> the same way as it is done now. i.e catch that exception and set proper >>> return state. >>> >>> Martin^2 >>> >> >> Shouldn't "CalledProcessError" raise an exception in this case? In my >> testing, it doesn't seem to raise an exception when the service does not >> even exist on the system. >> >> Gabe >> >> You are right, there is try-except-pass, so no exception can be raised >> >> def __enable(self, instance_name=""): >> try: >> ipautil.run([paths.SYSTEMCTL, "enable", >> self.service_instance(instance_name)]) >> except ipautil.CalledProcessError: >> pass >> >> >> Martin >> > > It is also the case for disable(), mask(), unmask(), etc. Should we update > the exception in __enable() or is there a reason that it just passes at > exception? > > Gabe > > > I dont think that we should chnge behavior there, what I'm missing there > is proper logging :) If you want you can create ticket for it. Leave > try-except-pass there, changing this may affect a lot of places, and there > is no time to fix it in 4.4 release. > > Martin^2 > Sounds good. Do you also want to keep the try-except-pass in ipa-nis-manage as well or does my patch suffice? Gabe > > >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 05/04/2016 09:17 AM, Gabe Alford wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Fix for <https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/5857> >>>> https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/5857 >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Gabe >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Abhijeet Kasurde >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
-- Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-devel mailing list: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel Contribute to FreeIPA: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Contribute/Code