On 09/16/2016 02:44 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (31/08/16 09:25), Justin Stephenson wrote:
> On 08/31/2016 06:59 AM, Pavel Březina wrote:
>> On 08/30/2016 08:52 PM, Justin Stephenson wrote:
>>> On 08/05/2016 11:45 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>> On (15/03/16 12:40), Pavel Březina wrote:
>>>>> On 12/09/2015 01:16 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 01:07:10PM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
>>>>>>>
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2813
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wanted to split include/debug_levels.xml into more files so
we
>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>> duplicate information, but I didn't figure out how to
use
>>>>>>> xi:include in
>>>>>>> files that are already beeing included. I always managed to
fail on
>>>>>>> dtd
>>>>>>> validation. Maybe someone more familiar with docbook may
chime in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If nesting doesn't work, wouldn't it be better to have a
separate file
>>>>>> with just the levels so that services would include the
>>>>>> how-to-debug-services.xml and then levels?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Either way, the new file must be added to src/man/po/po4a.cfg
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is the original patch with po4a.cfg altered.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> From fb91d0bb1a84e77c5900aae0f8ca8b634f9baea7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001
>>>>> From: =?UTF-8?q?Pavel=20B=C5=99ezina?= <pbrezina(a)redhat.com>
>>>>> Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 13:04:35 +0100
>>>>> Subject: [PATCH] sss_override: improve --debug description
>>>>>
>>>>> Resolves:
>>>>>
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2813
>>>>> ---
>>>> Bump for review
>>>
>>> + Critical failures. An error that doesn't kill the SSSD, but
>>> one that
>>> + indicates that at least one major feature is not going to work
>>> + properly.
>>> + </para>
>>> + <para>
>>>
>>> ACK with one minor change.
>>>
>>> s/kill the SSSD/kill SSSD/
>>
>> Since it was just copy pasted text I'm sending this change in separate
>> commit and did it in both places.
>
> Hi Pavel,
>
> I still see 'the SSSD' in the newly attached patch
> 0001-sss_override-improve-debug-descripption.patch
>
> One thing I noticed just now, I was not clear on understanding the Minor
> failures description.
>
> + <emphasis>0x0080</emphasis>: Minor failures. These are the
errors
> that
> + would percolate down to cause the operation failure of 2.
>
> Does it mean these are errors of minor importance that should not affect SSSD
> functionality but may lead up to Serious Failure errors
It means that those errors won't affect functionality of SSSD as a whole
but will probably lead up to failure of current operation (such as
invalid data downloaded, unexpected format, ...).
>
> Sorry to nitpick, if it reads well to others then ACK.
>
Pavel,
Could you prepare updated version?
Hi, I don't think I need to respin. The article "the" is removed in the
second patch.