On 11/12/2012 02:33 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/09/2012 03:18 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 14:28 +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
>> From 724ebcafa2d4e54df048ca2a578b03281fb7fe6f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: =?UTF-8?q?Pavel=20B=C5=99ezina?= <pbrezina(a)redhat.com>
>> Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 13:31:52 +0100
>> Subject: [PATCH 1/6] sudo: fix missing parameter in two debug messages
>>
>> ---
>> src/responder/sudo/sudosrv_get_sudorules.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/responder/sudo/sudosrv_get_sudorules.c
>> b/src/responder/sudo/sudosrv_get_sudorules.c
>> index
>>
b6e016c73cba6c86b9f20af63357c6fcc2b5508b..0e0437622e94a234b1597bcd272633f6944d4762
>> 100644
>> --- a/src/responder/sudo/sudosrv_get_sudorules.c
>> +++ b/src/responder/sudo/sudosrv_get_sudorules.c
>> @@ -369,7 +369,7 @@ errno_t sudosrv_get_rules(struct sudo_cmd_ctx
>> *cmd_ctx)
>> NULL, &groupnames);
>> if (ret != EOK) {
>> DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE,
>> - ("Unable to retrieve user info [%d]: %s\n",
>> strerror(ret)));
>> + ("Unable to retrieve user info [%d]: %s\n", ret,
>> strerror(ret)));
>> goto done;
>> }
>
> The comment says 2 debug messages, but the patch only has one, which is
> wrong ?
>
> Simo.
>
Hi,
thank you. Looks like I forgot to modify the second message. New patches
are attached.
I'm attaching a new set of patches base on IRC discussion with Simo
and Jakub.
Domain name is no longer sent to sudo. This was done without changing
the protocol.