On (02/08/16 16:39), Michal Židek wrote:
>On 08/02/2016 03:46 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (02/08/16 13:50), Petr Cech wrote:
>> > On 08/02/2016 12:41 PM, Petr Cech wrote:
>> > > On 08/02/2016 11:09 AM, Michal Židek wrote:
>> > > > Hi!
>> > > > 
>> > > > When reviewing Petr's netgroup patch I found some issues
>> > > > with netgroups when using IPA provider.
>> > > > 
>> > > > Attached patch fixes one of them.
>> > > > 
>> > > > I filed ticket for the other issue here:
>> > > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3117
>> > > > 
>> > > > Reviewing this is not priority for this week, but
>> > > > I already had the patch and wanted to put the
>> > > > list.
>> > > > 
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Michal
>> > > > 
>> > > > 0001-ipa_netgroups-Lowercase-key-to-htable.patch
>> > > > 
>> > > > 
>> > > >  From 2e5022452d7002e44ad17a59b4d5b12958721997 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> > > > From: =?UTF-8?q?Michal=20=C5=BDidek?= <[email protected]>
>> > > > Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 12:55:46 +0200
>> > > > Subject: [PATCH] ipa_netgroups: Lowercase key to htable
>> > > > 
>> > > > Fixes:
>> > > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3116
>> > > > 
>> > > > We lowercase the search key when storing
>> > > > entries into the hash table, but do not
>> > > > do it when we search for them. As a result
>> > > > we were not able to find netgroup by
>> > > > DN.
>> > > > ---
>> > > 
>> > > Hi Michal,
>> > > 
>> > > it looks good to me (aka LGTM).
>> > > I am waiting for CI.
>> > 
>> > CI passed:
>> > http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/50/67/summary.html
>> > 
>> > ACK
>> > 
>> > And for test... I think you might file a ticket.
>> > 
>> I'm sorry I have a different opinion.
>> Michal tried to resolve nested netgroup membership
>> which should have been fixed in #2275
>> This patch is just a fix to the partial problem.
>> 
>> a) it does not fix a bug
>
>It does fix one.
>
>> b) it does not have an integration test
>> c) id does not have an unit test
>      ^
>Yes we do not have upstream tests for netgroups.
>We should implement them.
>
>> 
>> Many people consider a code without code coverage as a legacy code.
>> We need to avoid such situations and moreover we need to avoid possible
>> regressions in future. Therefore nested netgroup membership in IPA
>> need to be fixed (and not just a partially). And we should have a test
>> for this bug. I don't might which king of test. But IMHO the simplest would
>> be to write an integration test to freeipa project.
>> 
>> => Conditional NACK untill resolvimng previously mentioned issues.
>> 
>> LS
>
>The purpose of this patch was to fix one
>particular bug in code that I found when looking into
>the netgroups. It fixes one issue with netgroups,
>not all of them. I sent it to list and filed the
>tickets so that I do not need to keep the information
>about it in my head.
>
Let me use a different example.
There is a crash[1] in current master if group or use contains brackets.
There were two "sub-bugs" in code. One in responder and other in
back-end. It does not make a sense to fix just one part.
Because from user point of view it still does not work.
It only make a sense to split fixes into two patches;
but that's the developer point of view.

>It does not have high priority (now) and I am OK
>if the two tickets are solved together later.
>
That is not true.
#2275 should have been fixed in 1.13.1
but it does not work. It is not important whether it's a regression
or it was fixed just a partially in #2275.
It has to be fixed very soon because there is a related downstream ticket
BZ1118257 and we do not have a lot of time. So it has the highest priority.

BTW the best way how to fix a bugs is to firstly write a test.
manual reproducer is just a wasting of time.
I did it in [1] :-)

LS

[1] 
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/[email protected]/thread/VTU7U2ST7IBSIIY6JCQVCBSAQDXXUCBB/
 
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/[email protected]

Reply via email to