On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 10:39:17PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 06:49:05PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 06:20:25PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> > > On (24/06/16 10:16), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > >On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 04:23:12PM -0400, Simo
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 06:20:25PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (24/06/16 10:16), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 04:23:12PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2016-06-23 at 21:36 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 09:21:17AM +0200, Jakub Hrozek
On (24/06/16 10:16), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 04:23:12PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> On Thu, 2016-06-23 at 21:36 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 09:21:17AM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> > > Given that Lukas says "http_parser can provide pkgconfig in
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 04:23:12PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-06-23 at 21:36 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 09:21:17AM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > Given that Lukas says "http_parser can provide pkgconfig in future", I
> > > read his mail as a preference to
On Thu, 2016-06-23 at 21:36 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 09:21:17AM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > Given that Lukas says "http_parser can provide pkgconfig in future", I
> > read his mail as a preference to keep the pkg-check test. And actually I
> > agree, it doesn't hurt,
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 09:21:17AM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> Given that Lukas says "http_parser can provide pkgconfig in future", I
> read his mail as a preference to keep the pkg-check test. And actually I
> agree, it doesn't hurt, let's keep it in.
I wanted to push these patches:
On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 09:59 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:54:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 12:57 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > Thanks, IIRC the int-instead of enum use is intentional, I will look
> > > at the others.
> >
> > The last
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 02:58:36PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 19:58 +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> > On (20/04/16 17:21), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > >On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 09:59:19AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 14:16 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > >>
On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 19:58 +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (20/04/16 17:21), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 09:59:19AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 14:16 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:54:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> >> >
On (20/04/16 17:21), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 09:59:19AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 14:16 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:54:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> > > On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 12:57 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> > > >
On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 17:18 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 09:43:05AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 11:12 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:32:59AM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > > > > From
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 09:59:19AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 14:16 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:54:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 12:57 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > > Thanks, IIRC the int-instead of enum use is
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 09:57:03AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 11:55 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:54:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 12:57 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > > Thanks, IIRC the int-instead of enum use is
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 09:43:05AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 11:12 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:32:59AM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > > > From 0dff46755af6063ed4b0339020ae5bb686692de1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > > > > From: Simo Sorce
On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 14:16 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:54:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 12:57 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > Thanks, IIRC the int-instead of enum use is intentional, I will look
> > > at the others.
> >
> > The last
On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 11:55 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:54:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 12:57 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > Thanks, IIRC the int-instead of enum use is intentional, I will look
> > > at the others.
> >
> > The last
On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 11:12 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:32:59AM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > > From 0dff46755af6063ed4b0339020ae5bb686692de1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > > > From: Simo Sorce
> > > > Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:13:28 -0500
> > > >
On 04/20/2016 02:16 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
+for (num = 0, i = 0; i < res->count; i++) {
>+const struct ldb_val *val;
>+char *name;
>+int n;
>+int j;
Every time I see variables declared in a scope in C except loop control
variables I think "This should be a
On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:54:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 12:57 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > Thanks, IIRC the int-instead of enum use is intentional, I will look
> > at the others.
>
> The last coverity/clang thing is a false positive, but I initialized
> reply to NULL
On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:54:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 12:57 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > Thanks, IIRC the int-instead of enum use is intentional, I will look
> > at the others.
>
> The last coverity/clang thing is a false positive, but I initialized
> reply to NULL
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:32:59AM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > From 0dff46755af6063ed4b0339020ae5bb686692de1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > > From: Simo Sorce
> > > Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:13:28 -0500
> > > Subject: [PATCH 02/15] Server: Enable Watchdog in all daemons
> > >
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 09:59:57AM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:54:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 12:57 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > Thanks, IIRC the int-instead of enum use is intentional, I will look
> > > at the others.
> >
> > The last
On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:54:10PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 12:57 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > Thanks, IIRC the int-instead of enum use is intentional, I will look
> > at the others.
>
> The last coverity/clang thing is a false positive, but I initialized
> reply to NULL
On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 14:54 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 12:57 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > Thanks, IIRC the int-instead of enum use is intentional, I will look
> > at the others.
>
> The last coverity/clang thing is a false positive, but I initialized
> reply to NULL anyway,
On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 13:05 +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (30/03/16 12:31), Simo Sorce wrote:
> >This patchset implements a new responder like service in SSSD called
> >secrets. It uses the Custodia project API to offer a service where
> >applications/users can store secrets in a way that
On (30/03/16 12:31), Simo Sorce wrote:
>This patchset implements a new responder like service in SSSD called
>secrets. It uses the Custodia project API to offer a service where
>applications/users can store secrets in a way that makes requests
>remotizable and routable with a high degree of
26 matches
Mail list logo