On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 03:52:35PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 04:06:37PM +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote: > > On 01/25/2016 08:54 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > > >On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 05:16:37PM +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote: > > >>Hello, > > >> > > >>attached patch does not seem to suffer from these errors any more. > > >> > > >>Shall I ask user who reported the bug If he is willing to test this new > > >>version of the patch? IIRC he needs more then a week for a testing to be > > >>conclusive... > > >> > > >>Thanks. > > >> > > >> > > > > > >Yes, please. We can do the review in the meantime. > > >_______________________________________________ > > >sssd-devel mailing list > > >sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org > > >https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org > > > > > > > User just confirmed that packages seem to be running fine on the test host, > > no memory usage growth. > > Right and with the help of the talloc patch in the first mail I've also > verified that the talloc usage stays the same. > > ACK
* master: 4231a17e66e0809a9c3d42207b45f95429cbb46c * sssd-1-13: 3bca87239e3368d61c25f2f6bd2329191eca0dee _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
