On (24/06/16 10:29), Michal Židek wrote:
>On 06/24/2016 09:57 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:04:21PM +0200, Michal Židek wrote:
>> > On 06/23/2016 09:40 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 09:10:34PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> > > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 07:29:13PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> > > > > On (23/06/16 18:59), Michal Židek wrote:
>> > > > > > On 06/23/2016 06:52 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> > > > > > > On (23/06/16 18:24), Michal Židek wrote:
>> > > > > > > > On 06/23/2016 05:50 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > Lukas,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > did you have some local patches related
to
>> > > > > > > > > this patch, that you did not send here?
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Because I can not apply the patch on
current
>> > > > > > > > > master and the changes in the context of
>> > > > > > > > > your patch seem like you did something
with
>> > > > > > > > > default config file path?
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Slightly modified version that applies
on
>> > > > > > > > > current master is attached (the changes
>> > > > > > > > > are the same, but the context differs).
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Michal
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I added the missing access check for
>> > > > > > > > snippets. If the snippets does not
>> > > > > > > > pass the access check it is skipped
>> > > > > > > > and a loud debug message is logged.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I attach it as separate patch for
>> > > > > > > > easier review, but it should be squashed
>> > > > > > > > before pushing. I also attach the first
>> > > > > > > > patch for convenience.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Michal
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > From
6299c0c9e2d07f0764be80e73334e3cdc2ba2b12 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> > > > > > > > From: =?UTF-8?q?Michal=20=C5=BDidek?=
<mzidek(a)redhat.com>
>> > > > > > > > Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:09:34 +0100
>> > > > > > > > Subject: [PATCH] confdb: Make it possible to
use config snippets
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Resolves:
>> > > > > > > >
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2247
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Slebodnik
<lslebodn(a)redhat.com>
>> > > > > > > > ---
>> > > > > LGTM.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > It isn't ACK because I was involved in development
>> > > > > and I didn;t test last version but code is fine fore me.
>> > > >
>> > > > I just ran a quick test and the patch works for me and the code
reads OK
>> > > > as well. I will push after CI finishes.
>> > > >
>> > > > I also opened:
>> > > >
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3062
>> > > > because the patch is missing documentation and
>> > > >
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3063
>> > > > to add at least a simple integration test.
>> > >
>> > > Actually, can we get rid of this warning?
>> > >
>> > > Error: COMPILER_WARNING:
>> > > sssd-1.13.91/src/util/sss_ini.c:216:17: warning: unused variable
'patterns' [-Wunused-variable]
>> > > # const char *patterns[] = { "^[^\\.].*\\.conf", NULL };
>> > > # ^
>> > > # 214| int ret;
>> > > # 215| #ifdef HAVE_LIBINI_CONFIG_V1
>> > > # 216|-> const char *patterns[] = {
"^[^\\.].*\\.conf", NULL };
>> > > # 217| const char *sections[] = { ".*", NULL };
>> > > # 218| #ifdef HAVE_LIBINI_CONFIG_V1_3
>> > >
>> > > Error: COMPILER_WARNING:
>> > > sssd-1.13.91/src/util/sss_ini.c: scope_hint: In function
'sss_ini_get_config'
>> > > sssd-1.13.91/src/util/sss_ini.c:217:17: warning: unused variable
'sections' [-Wunused-variable]
>> > > # const char *sections[] = { ".*", NULL };
>> > > # ^
>> > > # 215| #ifdef HAVE_LIBINI_CONFIG_V1
>> > > # 216| const char *patterns[] = { "^[^\\.].*\\.conf",
NULL };
>> > > # 217|-> const char *sections[] = { ".*", NULL };
>> > > # 218| #ifdef HAVE_LIBINI_CONFIG_V1_3
>> > > # 219| uint32_t i = 0;
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> >
>> > New patch attached.
>> >
>> > Michal
>> >
>>
>> The patch is fine, (so ack also from me), but can someone check if the
>> attached rebase on top of Pavel's sssctl is OK?
>>
>>
>
>I did not check the differences between the rebased and
>non-rebased version, but I just tried branch with sssctl
>patches + this rebased patch + startup validation patches
>and it worked for me.
>
>But the CI failed for me with the snippets in place.
>Will take a look at what is happening there.
>
It failed beccause it bas broken with libini_config 1.0 .. 1.2
and current CI machines still have libini_config 1.2
or 1.1 (el6)
Updated patch is attached.