On 02/20/2014 10:32 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (20/02/14 15:09), Martin Kosek wrote:
>> On 02/20/2014 02:54 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
>>> On 20.2.2014 14:47, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> We had a discussi
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> >>There is an error in libotp's find() function which assumes that
> >>get_basedn() always returns non-NULL value. This is not true for at
> >>least cn=Directory Manager.
> >>
> >>Patch attached.
> >More fixes required, now that Thierry produced th
On 20.2.2014 20:08, Martin Kosek wrote:
But I think a simple script like "startreview.py some.patch" that Petr
mentioned is a good start, few lines of code.
I have modified my push.py to start_review.py.
Clone
https://github.com/spacekpe/freeipa-processes.git
and read the commit message :-)
I
On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 15:59 -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> In attempting to write an OTP synchronization client, I've noticed it
> doesn't fit into the framework very well. The job of the client is to
> perform the synchronization extended operation. The format of the
> request is this:
>
>
On (20/02/14 15:09), Martin Kosek wrote:
>On 02/20/2014 02:54 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
>> On 20.2.2014 14:47, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>> On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is
>
On 02/20/2014 04:41 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 20.2.2014 16:34, Petr Viktorin wrote:
...
Note that Trac has XMLRPC so it is very very easy to have script for review
assignment etc.
$ start_review.py somerandomstring.patch
can very easily grep ticket URL and add your name to 'Reviewer' field in t
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 17:29 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> Patchwork:
> patch arrives: nothing
> mark self as reviewer: use web interface
> send review: reply, find patch in Patchwork, mark status
> send fixed patch: send the mail, find patch in Patchwork, mark
> status,
> find old patch in
On 02/20/2014 05:29 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:55 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:34 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
...
Mail+Trac:
patch arrives: tag message TODO when it comes in (1 keystroke)
mark self as reviewer: use web interface (or API)
send review: just
On 02/20/2014 12:57 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 06:47 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/20/2014 12:39 PM, freeipa wrote:
#4185: Index plugin namespaces by classes
-+-
Reporter: pviktori |
On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 14:13 +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> >Through the review process, patches are getting shifted around, added,
> >deleted, etc. So I'm now just going to be posting all the patches as an
> >ordered set. The set attached is order
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 09:19 -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:33 +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> > >There is definitely a bug (or more) in ipa-pwd-extop in handling
> > >authentication cases.
> > Some progress
On Mon, 2014-02-10 at 14:12 +0100, Petr Vobornik wrote:
> On 13.1.2014 17:09, Petr Vobornik wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > these patches implements the OTP Web UI.
> >
> > Last 5 patches is the OTP UI.
> >
> > First 6 patches is a little refactoring/bug fixes needed for them.
> > General password dialog is
On 02/20/2014 08:15 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:02 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:31, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:14:50PM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we intro
On 02/20/2014 06:47 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/20/2014 12:39 PM, freeipa wrote:
#4185: Index plugin namespaces by classes
-+-
Reporter: pviktori |Owner:
pviktori
Typ
On 02/20/2014 12:39 PM, freeipa wrote:
#4185: Index plugin namespaces by classes
-+-
Reporter: pviktori |Owner: pviktori
Type: refactoring | Status
Hi,
this patch fixes ticket https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4163
maximum serial number field now accepts only positive numbers
Thanks
Adam
From dd364e2bc41446854be966d0a09bf7bcde60c663 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Adam Misnyovszki
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 15:48:28 +0100
Subject: [PATCH]
On 02/20/2014 04:55 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:34 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:43 +0100, Tomas Babej wrote:
> > No. The only thing that happened automatically in Patchwork was that
> > entries got created. Patchwork doesn't even have threads - each
> > version of a patch needed to be individually marked as superseded.
> > Very much mindless clicking
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:34 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> >> On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, J
On 20.2.2014 14:20, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:39, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi,
I am now getting more familiar with PKCS#11 and did check which objects
are handled by softhsm and I think the best way would be a direct
mapping of a subset of the pkcs#11 objectclasses and attributes to LDA
On 02/20/2014 04:34 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>> On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wr
On 02/20/2014 03:42 PM, Adam Misnyovszki wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Martin Kosek"
>> To: "Adam Misnyovszki" , freeipa-devel@redhat.com
>> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 3:00:39 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Freeipa-devel] [PATCH]Add -f option to ipactl
>>
>> On 02/20/2014 02:15
On 20.2.2014 16:34, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 2
Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 0
On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:15:23AM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> > On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> > >> On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > >>> On Thu, Feb 20,
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> >> On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 01
ooops! Missed that. Updated Trac.
Thanks,
Gabe
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:48 AM, Petr Spacek wrote:
> On 20.2.2014 05:47, Darth Vader wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Changed when ntp sync's in ipa-client-install for the ticket below:
>>
>> https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/3957
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> We had a discussion with other
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> >> On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> >>> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is
> >>> rev
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>> On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
>>> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:36 +0100, Petr Spacek wrote:
> On 19.2.2014 17:55, Martin Basti wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 17:10 +0100, Petr Spacek wrote:
> >> On 19.2.2014 15:11, Petr Spacek wrote:
> >>> On 18.2.2014 17:34, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 17:06 +0100, Petr Vi
It would as well. But I think for short quick question like this one, the IRC
is better. If you do not have an IRC client configured on your machine you can
use freenode web interface:
http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=freeipa
It is quite easy to use.
Martin
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Gabe Alf
Will do. Email okay since I am not on IIRC?
Thanks,
Gabe
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> No problem, we are all learning. The common rule is that when a ticket is
> not
> assigned to "someone", i.e. free, it is better to ask the asignee on IRC
> and
> check if he is OK
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> >We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
> >which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
> >but that is a post-review t
- Original Message -
> From: "Martin Kosek"
> To: "Adam Misnyovszki" , freeipa-devel@redhat.com
> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 3:00:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [Freeipa-devel] [PATCH]Add -f option to ipactl
>
> On 02/20/2014 02:15 PM, Adam Misnyovszki wrote:
> >
> >
> > - Original M
No problem, we are all learning. The common rule is that when a ticket is not
assigned to "someone", i.e. free, it is better to ask the asignee on IRC and
check if he is OK with letting this ticket go. The person may already have some
work in progress (as Petr did in this case) or at least an idea
Sorry about that Petr. I got a little overzealous :) I can give it back
to you since you already have a patch in progress.
Gabe
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> Hello,
> I had this patch sitting around for some time but didn't get around to
> polishing and submitting
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:33 +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> >There is definitely a bug (or more) in ipa-pwd-extop in handling
> >authentication cases.
> Some progress on this investigation.
>
> Plugin precedence setting is broke
On 02/20/2014 02:54 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
> On 20.2.2014 14:47, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>> On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced
On 02/20/2014 02:15 PM, Adam Misnyovszki wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Martin Kosek"
>> To: d...@redhat.com, "Petr Spacek"
>> Cc: freeipa-devel@redhat.com
>> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 9:18:37 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Freeipa-devel] [PATCH]Add -f option to ipactl
>>
>> O
On 20.2.2014 14:47, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a pos
On 20.2.2014 14:31, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone
On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
>> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
>> but that is a post-review tag which is not useful
On 19.2.2014 17:55, Martin Basti wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 17:10 +0100, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 19.2.2014 15:11, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 18.2.2014 17:34, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 17:06 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/18/2014 04:45 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
Hello,
Add wa
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to know
which patches are alrea
On 20.2.2014 13:39, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi,
I am now getting more familiar with PKCS#11 and did check which objects
are handled by softhsm and I think the best way would be a direct
mapping of a subset of the pkcs#11 objectclasses and attributes to LDAP.
In my understanding we would only need
- Original Message -
> From: "Martin Kosek"
> To: d...@redhat.com, "Petr Spacek"
> Cc: freeipa-devel@redhat.com
> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 9:18:37 AM
> Subject: Re: [Freeipa-devel] [PATCH]Add -f option to ipactl
>
> On 02/19/2014 10:58 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
> > On 02/19/2014 0
On 02/20/2014 02:02 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
> On 20.2.2014 13:31, Sumit Bose wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:14:50PM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
>>> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commi
On 20.2.2014 13:31, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:14:50PM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not
On 02/20/2014 01:36 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:22 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that
On 02/20/2014 01:22 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
>> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
>> but that is a post-review tag which is not us
Hi,
I am now getting more familiar with PKCS#11 and did check which objects
are handled by softhsm and I think the best way would be a direct
mapping of a subset of the pkcs#11 objectclasses and attributes to LDAP.
In my understanding we would only need the objectclasses of storage
objects: ce
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
There is definitely a bug (or more) in ipa-pwd-extop in handling
authentication cases.
Some progress on this investigation.
Plugin precedence setting is broken in 389-ds. It is only set once,
before running init function provided by the plugin and d
On 02/20/2014 01:22 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is
>> reviewing
>> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit
>> message,
>> but that is a post-review tag which is
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:14:50PM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
> but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to
>
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to know
which patches are a
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to know
which patches are already reviewed and which are not reviewed.
W
On 02/20/2014 01:06 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 12:57 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/19/2014 05:32 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/19/2014 10:44 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/18/2014 08:02 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/18/2014 09:42 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/13/2014 01:12 PM, P
On 02/20/2014 12:58 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:20:12PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/19/2014 04:54 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
However: since this is about restoring a backup, can't the backup
contain the extended attributes, so that the SELinux context gets
restored
On 02/20/2014 12:57 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/19/2014 05:32 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> On 02/19/2014 10:44 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>>> On 02/18/2014 08:02 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/18/2014 09:42 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On 02/13/2014 01:12 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>> Hell
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:20:12PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/19/2014 04:54 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
> >
> >However: since this is about restoring a backup, can't the backup
> >contain the extended attributes, so that the SELinux context gets
> >restored to the original state (which could
On 02/19/2014 05:32 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/19/2014 10:44 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/18/2014 08:02 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/18/2014 09:42 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/13/2014 01:12 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
Hello,
These patches fix https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4074
On 02/19/2014 04:54 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 04:37:05PM +0100, Tomas Babej wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> When restoring files from backup, we do use an incorrect order of
>> operations - we first restore SELinux context and then copy the
>> files from backup, when we need to do the
On 02/20/2014 12:20 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/19/2014 04:54 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 04:37:05PM +0100, Tomas Babej wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> When restoring files from backup, we do use an incorrect order of
>>> operations - we first restore SELinux context and then co
On 02/19/2014 04:17 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 19.2.2014 14:45, Petr Viktorin wrote:
Hello,
This fixes https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4178
Thanks, ACK.
Thanks, pushed to master: 0824d12c95d840b1787743e8316b0bc0f7ba5284
--
Petr³
___
Fre
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
Through the review process, patches are getting shifted around
On 02/19/2014 04:54 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 04:37:05PM +0100, Tomas Babej wrote:
Hi,
When restoring files from backup, we do use an incorrect order of
operations - we first restore SELinux context and then copy the
files from backup, when we need to do the exact opposit
Hello,
This removes an unnecessary .mailmap line I left in by mistake. Thanks
to adelton for finding it.
Pushed to master under the one-liner rule:
340cbd4a7d2fc31ae20843477156a2948529a41e
--
Petr³
From c04b69e0a12a1f006768808b3898eedba5831575 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Petr Viktorin
Da
On 20.2.2014 09:35, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 19.2.2014 23:01, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/19/2014 03:30 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 19.2.2014 21:13, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/19/2014 01:49 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
Hello list,
I just came across this page:
http://www.gooze.eu/howto/using-openssh-with-sma
Hello,
I had this patch sitting around for some time but didn't get around to
polishing and submitting it lately.
The ticket was now claimed by "rga" (I assume that's the person who goes
by Darth Vader here?). I'm sharing the work hoping that it doesn't get
done twice.
https://fedorahosted.or
On 20.2.2014 05:47, Darth Vader wrote:
Hi,
Changed when ntp sync's in ipa-client-install for the ticket below:
https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/3957
Thanks,
Gabe
Thank you very much for your patch! Somebody will review it.
Please be so kind and update Trac with information about you
On 19.2.2014 23:01, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/19/2014 03:30 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 19.2.2014 21:13, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 02/19/2014 01:49 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
Hello list,
I just came across this page:
http://www.gooze.eu/howto/using-openssh-with-smartcards/using-ssh-authentication-agent-ss
On 02/19/2014 11:01 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
> On 02/19/2014 03:30 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
>> On 19.2.2014 21:13, Dmitri Pal wrote:
>>> On 02/19/2014 01:49 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
Hello list,
I just came across this page:
http://www.gooze.eu/howto/using-openssh-with-smartcards/using-
On 02/19/2014 10:58 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
> On 02/19/2014 03:13 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
>> On 19.2.2014 21:10, Dmitri Pal wrote:
>>> On 02/19/2014 11:58 AM, Adam Misnyovszki wrote:
Hi,
I reviewed this old patch:
If an error occurs in the start up sequence in ipactl start/restart,
75 matches
Mail list logo
