On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 01:12:34PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
Code-wise ack, but can you please resubmit so that the patch includes the upstream URL instead of the Red Hat Bugzilla? I've just cloned the bugzilla into https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1490
On 08/20/2012 02:48 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 01:12:34PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
Code-wise ack, but can you please resubmit so that the patch includes the upstream URL instead of the Red Hat Bugzilla? I've just cloned the bugzilla into https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1490
Patch is attached.
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:51:51PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 08/20/2012 02:48 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 01:12:34PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
Code-wise ack, but can you please resubmit so that the patch includes the upstream URL instead of the Red Hat Bugzilla? I've just cloned the bugzilla into https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1490
Patch is attached.
Ack
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:36:00PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:51:51PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 08/20/2012 02:48 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 01:12:34PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
Code-wise ack, but can you please resubmit so that the patch includes the upstream URL instead of the Red Hat Bugzilla? I've just cloned the bugzilla into https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1490
Patch is attached.
Ack
Pushed to master.
On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 12:40 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:36:00PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:51:51PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 08/20/2012 02:48 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 01:12:34PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
Code-wise ack, but can you please resubmit so that the patch includes the upstream URL instead of the Red Hat Bugzilla? I've just cloned the bugzilla into https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1490
Patch is attached.
Ack
Pushed to master.
This patch broke builds on RHEL 5. The ldap_destroy() function was added in openldap 2.4.24, but RHEL 5 only has 2.4.23.
On 08/21/2012 03:12 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 12:40 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:36:00PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:51:51PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 08/20/2012 02:48 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 01:12:34PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
Code-wise ack, but can you please resubmit so that the patch includes the upstream URL instead of the Red Hat Bugzilla? I've just cloned the bugzilla into https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1490
Patch is attached.
Ack
Pushed to master.
This patch broke builds on RHEL 5. The ldap_destroy() function was added in openldap 2.4.24, but RHEL 5 only has 2.4.23.
Ok. Fix is attached.
On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 15:56 +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 08/21/2012 03:12 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 12:40 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:36:00PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:51:51PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 08/20/2012 02:48 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 01:12:34PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849081
Code-wise ack, but can you please resubmit so that the patch includes the upstream URL instead of the Red Hat Bugzilla? I've just cloned the bugzilla into https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1490
Patch is attached.
Ack
Pushed to master.
This patch broke builds on RHEL 5. The ldap_destroy() function was added in openldap 2.4.24, but RHEL 5 only has 2.4.23.
Ok. Fix is attached.
Ack. As discussed with Pavel on IRC, we don't need to conditionalize this. The only difference between these two functions is that ldap_destroy() is safer if we have multiple handles to the same connection, which we never do.
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:07:42AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 15:56 +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 08/21/2012 03:12 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 12:40 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:36:00PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:51:51PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 08/20/2012 02:48 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 01:12:34PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849081 > > Code-wise ack, but can you please resubmit so that the patch includes > the upstream URL instead of the Red Hat Bugzilla? I've just cloned the > bugzilla into https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1490
Patch is attached.
Ack
Pushed to master.
This patch broke builds on RHEL 5. The ldap_destroy() function was added in openldap 2.4.24, but RHEL 5 only has 2.4.23.
Ok. Fix is attached.
Ack. As discussed with Pavel on IRC, we don't need to conditionalize this. The only difference between these two functions is that ldap_destroy() is safer if we have multiple handles to the same connection, which we never do.
Pushed to master.
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
-
Jakub Hrozek -
Pavel Březina -
Stephen Gallagher