On (11/11/15 18:04), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>
>
>On 11/10/2015 05:00 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>[snip]
>>I tried it and all test passed.
>>
>>Please fix small issues and you have my ACK.
>>
>>LS
>
>Thanks, updated patch set attached.
>From 5f43c3ddef195a7a480755306349555e059778a3 Mon Sep 17
On (12/11/15 09:35), Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>On (11/11/15 18:04), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>
>>
>>On 11/10/2015 05:00 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>[snip]
>>>I tried it and all test passed.
>>>
>>>Please fix small issues and you have my ACK.
>>>
>>>LS
>>
>>Thanks, updated patch set attached.
>
>>From
On 11/10/2015 05:00 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
[snip]
I tried it and all test passed.
Please fix small issues and you have my ACK.
LS
Thanks, updated patch set attached.
>From 5f43c3ddef195a7a480755306349555e059778a3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pavel Reichl
Date:
On (05/11/15 17:01), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>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
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 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 (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 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 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 11/04/2015 12:53 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
From f9b5adc160d6c18c429cc4e12276896ccc6f7a6d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pavel Reichl
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:13:53 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] TESTS: fix typo in PAM service name
What is the purpose of this patch? Just
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 responder unit test
Extend PAM responder unit test to check
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:21:50PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> Hello,
>
> please see first iteration of extended PAM responder unit tests.
> From 7cd365de5c306cb42901e510ff14df1b76c6bddb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Pavel Reichl
> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 08:07:02 -0400
>
On (04/11/15 13:14), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>
>
>On 11/04/2015 12:53 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>
>>> From f9b5adc160d6c18c429cc4e12276896ccc6f7a6d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>>From: Pavel Reichl
>>>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:13:53 -0400
>>>Subject: [PATCH 3/3] TESTS: fix typo in PAM
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 "TEST:" usually means that tou adding new test
or
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 01:58:51PM +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>
>
> On 11/04/2015 01:19 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >On (04/11/15 13:14), Pavel Reichl wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>On 11/04/2015 12:53 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>>
> From f9b5adc160d6c18c429cc4e12276896ccc6f7a6d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
On (04/11/15 13:42), Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>On (20/10/15 15:21), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>Hello,
>>
>>please see first iteration of extended PAM responder unit tests.
>
>>From 7cd365de5c306cb42901e510ff14df1b76c6bddb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>From: Pavel Reichl
>>Date: Tue, 20
On 11/04/2015 01:19 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (04/11/15 13:14), Pavel Reichl wrote:
On 11/04/2015 12:53 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
From f9b5adc160d6c18c429cc4e12276896ccc6f7a6d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pavel Reichl
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:13:53 -0400
On 11/04/2015 02:23 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 01:58:51PM +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote:
On 11/04/2015 01:19 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (04/11/15 13:14), Pavel Reichl wrote:
On 11/04/2015 12:53 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
From f9b5adc160d6c18c429cc4e12276896ccc6f7a6d
On (20/10/15 15:21), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>Hello,
>
>please see first iteration of extended PAM responder unit tests.
>From 7cd365de5c306cb42901e510ff14df1b76c6bddb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>From: Pavel Reichl
>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 08:07:02 -0400
>Subject: [PATCH 1/3] TESTS:
On (04/11/15 14:40), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>
>
>On 11/04/2015 02:23 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
>>On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 01:58:51PM +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>On 11/04/2015 01:19 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (04/11/15 13:14), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>
>
>On 11/04/2015 12:53 PM,
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 tested corners of pam_reply() - 'Printing account
> >>expiration warning for sshd' requires
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 tested corners of pam_reply() - 'Printing account
expiration warning for sshd' requires pam_service to be sshd, but I can
change when I will write another test (it might happen
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 tested corners of pam_reply() - 'Printing account
expiration warning
Hello,
please see first iteration of extended PAM responder unit tests.
>From 7cd365de5c306cb42901e510ff14df1b76c6bddb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pavel Reichl
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 08:07:02 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] TESTS: split pam_test_setup() so it can be reused
31 matches
Mail list logo