-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
[PATCH 1/2] Initgroups on a non-cached user should go to the data provider
We were accidentally returning an error when sysdb_getpwnam() returned zero results internally in sysdb_initgroups(). The correct behavior here is to return EOK and a result object with zero entries.
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/620
[PATCH 2/2] Request all group attributes during initgroups processing
We tried to be too clever and only requested the name of the group, but we require the objectClass to validate the results.
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/622
- -- Stephen Gallagher RHCE 804006346421761
Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 09/13/2010 11:48 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
[PATCH 1/2] Initgroups on a non-cached user should go to the data provider
We were accidentally returning an error when sysdb_getpwnam() returned zero results internally in sysdb_initgroups(). The correct behavior here is to return EOK and a result object with zero entries.
Sorry, noticed a tiny oversight on patch 0001. I had only fixed the DEBUG message for the add case, and missed the del case. The new patch 0001 corrects this.
- -- Stephen Gallagher RHCE 804006346421761
Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:09:28 -0400 Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
Sorry, noticed a tiny oversight on patch 0001. I had only fixed the DEBUG message for the add case, and missed the del case. The new patch 0001 corrects this.
Aren't those bugs a separate issue worth their own patch ? (there is also no mention of this issue in the commit message AFAICS)
Simo.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 09/13/2010 03:41 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:09:28 -0400 Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
Sorry, noticed a tiny oversight on patch 0001. I had only fixed the DEBUG message for the add case, and missed the del case. The new patch 0001 corrects this.
Aren't those bugs a separate issue worth their own patch ? (there is also no mention of this issue in the commit message AFAICS)
Simo.
I can split them out. I only included them because I needed to fix them to help identify the real problem.
- -- Stephen Gallagher RHCE 804006346421761
Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:43:33 -0400 Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 09/13/2010 03:41 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:09:28 -0400 Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
Sorry, noticed a tiny oversight on patch 0001. I had only fixed the DEBUG message for the add case, and missed the del case. The new patch 0001 corrects this.
Aren't those bugs a separate issue worth their own patch ? (there is also no mention of this issue in the commit message AFAICS)
Simo.
I can split them out. I only included them because I needed to fix them to help identify the real problem.
They are a potential crash bug, so it would be better if we separated them as they are a fix on their own.
If you split them you get as bonus an automatic ack for all three :)
Simo.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 09/13/2010 04:36 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:43:33 -0400 Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 09/13/2010 03:41 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:09:28 -0400 Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
Sorry, noticed a tiny oversight on patch 0001. I had only fixed the DEBUG message for the add case, and missed the del case. The new patch 0001 corrects this.
Aren't those bugs a separate issue worth their own patch ? (there is also no mention of this issue in the commit message AFAICS)
Simo.
I can split them out. I only included them because I needed to fix them to help identify the real problem.
They are a potential crash bug, so it would be better if we separated them as they are a fix on their own.
If you split them you get as bonus an automatic ack for all three :)
Simo.
Split and attached for posterity. Thanks for the review.
- -- Stephen Gallagher RHCE 804006346421761
Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 09/14/2010 02:07 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Split and attached for posterity. Thanks for the review.
Also ack to all three patches.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 09/17/2010 07:32 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On 09/14/2010 02:07 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Split and attached for posterity. Thanks for the review.
Also ack to all three patches.
Pushed to master.
- -- Stephen Gallagher RHCE 804006346421761
Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org