On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 01:35:04PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>
>
> On 10/05/2015 11:55 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 01:15:10PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>On 09/30/2015 03:43 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 11:40:34AM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>On 09/21/2015 05:47 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>>>>On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 01:03:13PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>On 09/21/2015 10:52 AM, Pavel Březina wrote:
> >>>>>>>On 08/28/2015 11:05 AM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> >>>>>>>>On 08/14/2015 04:12 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Test failed because of missing patch [PATCH 6/9]
DYNDNS: use realm and
> >>>>>>>>server commands only as fallback
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>I must have skipped it while respinning the patch
set, sorry.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>I attached this missing patch and test that was
failing because of it.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Hi,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> DYNDNS: use realm and server commands only as
fallback
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Resolves:
> >>>>>>>>
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2195
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>You have a wrong ticket number here, I think. The patches
look good otherwise.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Yes, thanks for noticing! Updated patchset attached.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2495 that the ticket
reference is
> >>>>>closed, did you mean another one?
> >>>>
> >>>>We cleared that off-list - patch was accidentally omitted from the
original patch set.
> >>>
> >>>Can you rebase these patches, please?
> >>
> >>Sure, rebased patches attached.
> >
> >The patches seem to work well for both IPA and AD, CI also passes:
> >
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/29/29/summary.html
> >
> >See two questions inline:
> >
> >> From b59a854b5a57cfbedd79a5d3b42555c65d4a3c1f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >>From: Pavel Reichl <preichl(a)redhat.com>
> >>Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 10:51:50 -0400
> >>Subject: [PATCH 1/2] DYNDNS: use realm and server commands only as fallback
> >>
> >>Resolves:
> >>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2495
> >>---
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >>@@ -375,6 +375,23 @@ static char *nsupdate_msg_add_ptr(char *update_msg,
> >> return update_msg;
> >> }
> >>
> >>+static char *
> >>+nsupdate_msg_add_realm_cmd(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, const char *realm)
> >>+{
> >>+ if (realm != NULL) {
> >>+ return talloc_asprintf(mem_ctx, "realm %s\n", realm);
> >>+ }
> >>+ return talloc_asprintf(mem_ctx, "\n");
> >>+}
> >>+#else
> >>+static char *
> >>+nsupdate_msg_add_realm_cmd(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, const char *realm)
> >>+{
> >>+ return talloc_asprintf(mem_ctx, "\n");
> >>+}
> >
> >Wouldn't this be more compact and readable:
>
> Sure, I'll do that.
>
> >
> >static char *
> >nsupdate_msg_add_realm_cmd(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, const char *realm)
> >{
> >#ifdef HAVE_NSUPDATE_REALM
> > if (realm != NULL) {
> > return talloc_asprintf(mem_ctx, "realm %s\n", realm);
> > }
> >#endif
> > return talloc_asprintf(mem_ctx, "\n");
> >}
> >
> >Additionally, what versions of nsupdate do /not/ have the realm command?
> >If they are very old, can we just drop the support for them? (I haven't
> >checked, just asking..)
>
> It seems to me that support for REALM keyword was introduced in bind 9.9.0 in
'bug' 2929 (
https://kb.isc.org/article/AA-00496/0/). In my opinion this is old
version and we can expect newer version to be present on rhel and fedora.
>
> Petr, do you agree? Thanks!
If RHEL-6 and later contain the nsupdate version with realm, then I
would prefer to remove this code..it wouldn't be tested anyway (we don't
have separately built unit tests for this condition..)
But that can be done in a follow-up patch.
I think there are distributions which
does not have it.
IIRC altlinux. I would need to check.
LS