[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-06-29 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-06-29 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-06-29 Thread Lukas Slebodnik
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-06-24 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-06-23 Thread Simo Sorce
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,

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-06-23 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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:

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-21 Thread Simo Sorce
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-21 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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: > > >>

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Simo Sorce
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: > >> >

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Lukas Slebodnik
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: >> > > >

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Simo Sorce
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread 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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Simo Sorce
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Simo Sorce
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 > > > >

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Pavel Reichl
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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 > > >

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-20 Thread Jakub Hrozek
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-19 Thread Simo Sorce
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,

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-05 Thread Simo Sorce
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

[SSSD] Re: [PATCH SET} A new Secrets service

2016-04-01 Thread Lukas Slebodnik
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