On 04/18/2012 12:38 AM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 04/17/2012 01:13 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 04/17/2012 06:46 PM, John Dennis wrote:
Thank you for the explanation Petr, it's very much appreciated.
I do have a problem with this patch and I'm inclined to NAK it, but I'm
open to discussion. Here's m
On 04/17/2012 01:13 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 04/17/2012 06:46 PM, John Dennis wrote:
>> Thank you for the explanation Petr, it's very much appreciated.
>>
>> I do have a problem with this patch and I'm inclined to NAK it, but I'm
>> open to discussion. Here's my thoughts, if I've made mistakes
On 04/17/2012 06:46 PM, John Dennis wrote:
Thank you for the explanation Petr, it's very much appreciated.
I do have a problem with this patch and I'm inclined to NAK it, but I'm
open to discussion. Here's my thoughts, if I've made mistakes in my
reasoning please point them out.
The fundamental
Thank you for the explanation Petr, it's very much appreciated.
I do have a problem with this patch and I'm inclined to NAK it, but I'm
open to discussion. Here's my thoughts, if I've made mistakes in my
reasoning please point them out.
The fundamental problem is many of our command line util
On 04/17/2012 04:12 PM, John Dennis wrote:
There have been so many versions of the patch and various comments
attached to it I'm afraid I'm still trying to wrap my head around what
the actual problem is we're trying to solve, until I have that
understanding I can't evaluate the proposed solution.
There have been so many versions of the patch and various comments
attached to it I'm afraid I'm still trying to wrap my head around what
the actual problem is we're trying to solve, until I have that
understanding I can't evaluate the proposed solution.
Could you please state simply what the
On 04/17/2012 12:12 AM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
John Dennis wrote:
On 04/16/2012 04:15 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
John Dennis wrote:
On 04/16/2012 01:31 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
John Dennis wrote:
On 04/13/2012 06:25 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
When the utility sets logging to console, the extra
John Dennis wrote:
On 04/16/2012 04:15 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
John Dennis wrote:
On 04/16/2012 01:31 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
John Dennis wrote:
On 04/13/2012 06:25 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
When the utility sets logging to console, the extra log message gets
printed out there. I agree th
On 04/16/2012 04:15 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
John Dennis wrote:
On 04/16/2012 01:31 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
John Dennis wrote:
On 04/13/2012 06:25 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
When the utility sets logging to console, the extra log message gets
printed out there. I agree this isn't optimal.
At
John Dennis wrote:
On 04/16/2012 01:31 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
John Dennis wrote:
On 04/13/2012 06:25 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
When the utility sets logging to console, the extra log message gets
printed out there. I agree this isn't optimal.
Attached patch removes the console log handler be
On 04/16/2012 01:31 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
John Dennis wrote:
On 04/13/2012 06:25 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
When the utility sets logging to console, the extra log message gets
printed out there. I agree this isn't optimal.
Attached patch removes the console log handler before logging the
res
John Dennis wrote:
On 04/13/2012 06:25 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
When the utility sets logging to console, the extra log message gets
printed out there. I agree this isn't optimal.
Attached patch removes the console log handler before logging the
result.
I read through log_manager, and found t
On 04/13/2012 06:25 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
When the utility sets logging to console, the extra log message gets
printed out there. I agree this isn't optimal.
Attached patch removes the console log handler before logging the result.
I read through log_manager, and found that I can do this mo
On 04/12/2012 01:30 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 04/10/2012 10:41 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/30/2012 11:00 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/26/2012 05:35 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/26/2012 04:54 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Some minor compliant
On 03/30/2012 06:21 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
Updated patch: only log if logging has been configured (detected by
looking at the root logger's handlers), and changed the message to “The
ipa-server-install command has succeeded/failed”.
Actually the log_manager has an attribute called configure_s
On 04/10/2012 10:41 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/30/2012 11:00 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/26/2012 05:35 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/26/2012 04:54 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Some minor compliants.
Ideally, there would be a routine that s
Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/30/2012 11:00 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/26/2012 05:35 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/26/2012 04:54 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Some minor compliants.
Ideally, there would be a routine that sets up the logging and handles
command-line arg
On 03/30/2012 11:00 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/26/2012 05:35 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/26/2012 04:54 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Some minor compliants.
Ideally, there would be a routine that sets up the logging and handles
command-line arguments in some uniform
Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/26/2012 05:35 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/26/2012 04:54 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Some minor compliants.
Ideally, there would be a routine that sets up the logging and handles
command-line arguments in some uniform way (which is also needed before
logging setup
On 03/26/2012 05:35 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/26/2012 04:54 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Some minor compliants.
Ideally, there would be a routine that sets up the logging and handles
command-line arguments in some uniform way (which is also needed before
logging setup to detect ipa-server-
On 03/26/2012 04:54 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Some minor compliants.
Ideally, there would be a routine that sets up the logging and handles
command-line arguments in some uniform way (which is also needed before
logging setup to detect ipa-server-install --uninstall).
The original patch did
Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/15/2012 11:30 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/01/2012 11:45 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/29/2012 07:46 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Martin Kosek wrote:
On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 17:51 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/22/2012 10:41 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
This fixes ht
On 03/15/2012 11:30 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 03/01/2012 11:45 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/29/2012 07:46 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Martin Kosek wrote:
On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 17:51 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/22/2012 10:41 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
This fixes https://fedorahosted.org
On 03/01/2012 11:45 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/29/2012 07:46 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Martin Kosek wrote:
On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 17:51 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/22/2012 10:41 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
This fixes https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/2071 (Add final
debug
message
On 02/29/2012 07:46 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Martin Kosek wrote:
On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 17:51 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/22/2012 10:41 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
This fixes https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/2071 (Add final
debug
message in installers). The try/except blocks at the e
25 matches
Mail list logo
