On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 11:12 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 05:30:01PM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote: > > Hi, i would comment for to see if i'm wrong. > > > > Ticket https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1339 > > > > "auth_provider = none" already exists (it seems) > > > > Reading theory in > > http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/sssd/1.8.91/man/sssd.conf.5.html > > mentions that: > > > > auth_provider (string) > > "none" disallows password changes explicitly. > > Default: "id_provider" is used if it is set and can handle authentication > > requests. > > > > in data_provider_be.c > > [code] > > if (strcasecmp(mod_name, NO_PROVIDER) == 0) { > > ret = ENOENT; > > goto done; > > } > > [/code] > > > > and by placing "id_provider = proxy" the default auth_provider= > > id_provider (proxy) , this ago that request proxy_pam_target. > > > > this is correct? > > > > Thanks. > > I think you're right. I bumped the ticket back to NEEDS_TRIAGE so we can > discuss if we close it (and what to do with the assiociated RHBZ).
Okay, I guess I must have gotten confused because of the 'default to id_provider' approach we took. Thanks Ariel for investigating this. I think we can close it as INVALID.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
