URL:
https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/59
Title: #59: ipa_netgroups: Lowercase key to htable
lslebodn commented:
"""
On (20/10/16 02:58), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 02:55:12AM -0700, lslebodn wrote:
> On (20/10/16 02:20), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 01:40:15AM -0700, lslebodn wrote:
> >> On (20/10/16 01:21), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >> >before the patch:
> >> >```
> >> >[jhrozek@client] sssd $ [] getent netgroup ngr1
> >> >ngr1 (-,user1,ipa.test)
> >> >[jhrozek@client] sssd $ [] getent netgroup ngr2
> >> >[jhrozek@client] sssd $ []
> >> >```
> >> >
> >> >After the patch:
> >> >```
> >> >[jhrozek@client] sssd $ [(review)] getent netgroup ngr1
> >> >ngr1 (-,user1,ipa.test)
> >> >[jhrozek@client] sssd $ [(review)] getent netgroup ngr2
> >> >ngr2 (-,user1,ipa.test) (-,user1,ipa.test)
> >> >[jhrozek@client] sssd $ [(review)]
> >> >```
> >> >
> >> >So the netgroup can be resolved, but is it correct that the netgroup
member is listed twice?
> >> >
> >> It's impossible to say without content of netgroups on server.
> >> Could you provide them?
> >
> >Same as the reproducer in the ticket. But the point is, is it ever OK to
> >print duplicates? I guess they are harmless, but it just looks odd.
> >
> Then the bug is not fixed
Well, a different bug is fixed (and Michal was arguing there are two
bugs..). Before, the netgroup was not resolved at all, after the patch it is.
Thank you very much for reminder.
I look closer to the ticket
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3116
and it was closed as a duplicate of #3117
We should not used closed ticket in commit message.
Therefore closing this PR as rejected.
LS
"""
See the full comment at
https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/59#issuecomment-255066482