On (04/11/15 16:03), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>On 11/04/2015 01:42 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>
>>>From fa082a04387ed83f1b12316d388b63a08ba1305d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>>From: Pavel Reichl
>>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:10:30 -0400
>>>Subject: [PATCH 2/3] TESTS: extend PAM
On (04/11/15 18:58), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>
>
>On 11/04/2015 06:41 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
>>On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 06:00:34PM +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>On 11/04/2015 03:02 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (04/11/15 14:40), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>
>
>Also one of few not yet
On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 10:52:35AM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
> Nevertheless I think the rule is there to allow the swift handling of
> emergencies and not to make it easy to commit minor change in general.
Yes.
Please don't misuse this rule in the future, especially for commiting
different patch
On (05/11/15 09:50), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>
>
>On 11/05/2015 08:59 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>On (04/11/15 18:58), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>On 11/04/2015 06:41 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 06:00:34PM +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>
>
>On 11/04/2015 03:02 PM,
On (05/11/15 09:38), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 08:50:13AM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> So do we want to add new warnig from static analyzers?
>
>No. ACK.
>
OK,
master:
* a10f67d4c64f3b1243de5d86a996475361adf0ac
sssd-1-13:
* db2fdba6f3cecd0612439988e61be60d5d8576bf
It was
On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 08:50:13AM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> So do we want to add new warnig from static analyzers?
No. ACK.
___
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
On 11/05/2015 08:59 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (04/11/15 18:58), Pavel Reichl wrote:
On 11/04/2015 06:41 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 06:00:34PM +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote:
On 11/04/2015 03:02 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (04/11/15 14:40), Pavel Reichl wrote:
On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 10:29:41AM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (05/11/15 09:50), Pavel Reichl wrote:
> >
> >
> >On 11/05/2015 08:59 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >>On (04/11/15 18:58), Pavel Reichl wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On 11/04/2015 06:41 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 04, 2015
On (05/11/15 10:52), Sumit Bose wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 10:29:41AM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (05/11/15 09:50), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >On 11/05/2015 08:59 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> >>On (04/11/15 18:58), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>On 11/04/2015 06:41
On 11/04/2015 05:01 PM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
On 11/04/2015 04:25 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/03/2015 06:30 PM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
Now, I think I got confused here. I'm not actually testing negative
cache, but
only the fact that the changes to LDAP don't appear before the caches
On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 01:02:07PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (05/11/15 12:42), Sumit Bose wrote:
> >On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 12:12:17PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >> ehlo,
> >>
> >> attached simple patch is a result of "Fedora end of life"
> >> message for related Fedora ticket.
> >>
On (04/11/15 14:10), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>On 11/04/2015 01:45 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] TESTS: extend PAM responder unit test
>>and maybe title of commit message could be changed as well.
>>
>>Becuase many changes to unit tests mean extending unit test.
>>BTW. prefix
On (05/11/15 11:27), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>On 11/05/2015 11:06 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>So the oneliner was used for UNBLOCKING review and cut off unimportant
>>discussion. Because we could spent many hours about proper name.
>
>And yet here we are.
the discussion changed to different topic and
On (05/11/15 10:58), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 10:52:35AM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
>> Nevertheless I think the rule is there to allow the swift handling of
>> emergencies and not to make it easy to commit minor change in general.
>
>Yes.
>
>Please don't misuse this rule in the
On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 12:22:00PM +0100, Petr Cech wrote:
> On 10/21/2015 03:19 PM, Petr Cech wrote:
> >On 10/12/2015 11:37 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> From a15acee2495ee12190e711f3344e14c54fc73062 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Petr Cech
> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015
ehlo,
attached simple patch is a result of "Fedora end of life"
message for related Fedora ticket.
If you have an idea about better names I will be glad to change them.
BTW shoulw we also remove this part from function
sss_write_krb5_conf_snippet
LS
>From
On 10/21/2015 03:19 PM, Petr Cech wrote:
On 10/12/2015 11:37 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> From a15acee2495ee12190e711f3344e14c54fc73062 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>From: Petr Cech
>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 08:57:15 -0400
>Subject: [PATCH 10/11] KRB5_CHILD: More restrictive umask
>
>We
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:00:21PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> ehlo,
>
> There aren't any documented files in directory src/sss_client/sudo/
>
> LS
ACK
CI: http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/32/09/summary.html
___
sssd-devel mailing list
On 11/05/2015 11:06 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (05/11/15 10:52), Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 10:29:41AM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (05/11/15 09:50), Pavel Reichl wrote:
On 11/05/2015 08:59 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (04/11/15 18:58), Pavel Reichl wrote:
On
On (05/11/15 12:42), Sumit Bose wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 12:12:17PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> ehlo,
>>
>> attached simple patch is a result of "Fedora end of life"
>> message for related Fedora ticket.
>>
>> If you have an idea about better names I will be glad to change them.
>>
On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 12:12:17PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> ehlo,
>
> attached simple patch is a result of "Fedora end of life"
> message for related Fedora ticket.
>
> If you have an idea about better names I will be glad to change them.
>
> BTW shoulw we also remove this part from
On (05/11/15 13:07), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:00:21PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> ehlo,
>>
>> There aren't any documented files in directory src/sss_client/sudo/
>>
>> LS
>
>ACK
>
>CI: http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/32/09/summary.html
master:
*
On 11/04/2015 11:11 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
Hi,
Sorry it took so long to get back to the review. I only have some minor
comments, see inline..
Because the group patches are more or less equivalent, I'll just comment
here. If you agree with the comments, please also change the group tests
and
On 11/05/2015 09:17 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
Let's image following use case:
* cached authentication is enabled.
* user "pamuser" has never authenticated to the machine and thus
password is not cached
* for the first time the the data provider should be contacted.
( storing cached
On (05/11/15 12:58), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 12:22:00PM +0100, Petr Cech wrote:
>> On 10/21/2015 03:19 PM, Petr Cech wrote:
>> >On 10/12/2015 11:37 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> From a15acee2495ee12190e711f3344e14c54fc73062 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Petr
25 matches
Mail list logo