On Sat, Feb 04, 2012 at 03:39:54PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> 
> 
> On Feb 4, 2012, at 3:20 PM, Jakub Hrozek <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, Feb 04, 2012 at 09:41:30AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2012-02-04 at 08:34 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 2012-02-04 at 08:22 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 16:08 +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 09:01:29PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >>>>>> On Thu, 2012-02-02 at 12:36 +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 08:28:37PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 16:02 +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> We will want to set this option (but perhaps not
> >>>>>>>>> --enable-all-experimental-features) for F17 to be able to build the 
> >>>>>>>>> sudo
> >>>>>>>>> library.
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1145
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> At the time being the option is also turned on when
> >>>>>>>>> --enable-all-experimental-features is specified.
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> The second patch does the refactoring mentioned in #1145 - just 
> >>>>>>>>> moves
> >>>>>>>>> code around so that there are no #ifdefs in the main part of LDAP 
> >>>>>>>>> code.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Ack to the first, Nack to the second.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> There's no need for ldap_sudo.c AND sdap_sudo.c.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> I thought the difference was that the ldap_*.c files contain
> >>>>>>> one-shot initialization-time functions and the sdap_*.c files contain
> >>>>>>> the actual async functions.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> The only reason we still have ldap_*.c in the code is legacy. We
> >>>>>>>> switched to the 'sdap' prefix a long while ago to avoid potential
> >>>>>>>> conflicts (as well as confusion whether a particular file was part of
> >>>>>>>> SSSD or openldap). Just put it into sdap_sudo.c please.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> (One of these days we should just rename those old files to avoid
> >>>>>>>> confusion...)
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> New patches attached.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Ack.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Sorry, self-nack. I realized that the patch would break IPA provider. We
> >>>>> can't use sssm_ldap_*_init in sdap_sudo.c because that is also used by
> >>>>> the IPA provider which wouldn't be able to resolve symbols.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> New patches attached.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Ack
> >>> 
> >>> Pushed to master.
> >> 
> >> Looks like this patch is breaking builds on RHEL 5 too:
> >> 
> >> configure: Detected operating system type: redhat
> >> checking for struct ucred.pid... yes
> >> checking for struct ucred.uid... yes
> >> checking for struct ucred.gid... yes
> >> ./configure: line 22352: syntax error near unexpected token `fi'
> >> ./configure: line 22352: `fi;'
> >> error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.39842 (%build)
> >> RPM build errors:
> >>    Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.39842 (%build)
> >> Child return code was: 1
> >> EXCEPTION: Command failed. See logs for output.
> >> # ['bash', '--login', '-c', 'rpmbuild -bb --target i386 --nodeps 
> >> builddir/build/SPECS/sssd.spec']
> >> Traceback (most recent call last):
> >>  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py", 
> >> line 70, in trace
> >>    result = func(*args, **kw)
> >>  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/mockbuild/util.py", line 352, in do
> >>    raise mockbuild.exception.Error, ("Command failed. See logs for 
> >> output.\n # %s" % (command,), child.returncode)
> >> Error: Command failed. See logs for output.
> >> # ['bash', '--login', '-c', 'rpmbuild -bb --target i386 --nodeps 
> >> builddir/build/SPECS/sssd.spec']
> >> LEAVE do --> EXCEPTION RAISED
> > 
> > Turns out that the old autoconf releases do not cope well with an empty
> > "[]" not folowed by a ",". A patch is attached.
> 
> Ack. Please push to master. I'm not near a computer right now.
> 
> 

Pushed to master.
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel

Reply via email to