On 08/09/2016 10:47 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (09/08/16 10:35), Pavel Březina wrote:
> > On 07/20/2016 11:10 AM, Pavel Březina wrote:
> > > CI: http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/50/01/summary.html
> > >
> > > The failure is about missing dependencies, unrelated to these patches.
> > >
> > > It depends on the sssctl failover patches due to changes in attaching
> > > dbus message to a talloc context. Now it is possible to also free the
> > > message with both dbus_message_unref() and talloc_free(). Since the
> > > sssctl patches are already in late review process I didn't want to
> > > change them.
> > Bump.
> I had a plan to test these patches
> but there are still some regressions in sssd
> and I would like to avoid introducing new ones without testing.
> Do these patches block you or other patches?
I would like to build on top of those patches further improvements to sssctl,
such as talloc memory report. That said, I'd like to get them reviewed sooner
that later, it doesn't need to be pushed though.