[SSSD] [PATCH] fix internal consistency check

Sumit Bose sbose at redhat.com
Tue Nov 24 20:47:57 UTC 2009


On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 02:58:10PM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 17:47 +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 11:23:10AM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 09:04 +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 05:21:37PM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > > > We used to do this via a preprocessor macro so the build would fail
> > > > > but since we changed the original code to use enums instead this is not
> > > > > possible anymore.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Turn it into a runtime check.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Simo.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Looks good, but I think the error message should clearly say that this
> > > > is a packaging error and the user cannot do anything to fix this.
> > > 
> > > Doesn't matter, normal users *must never* see this error.
> > > 
> > > Simo.
> > > 
> > 
> > ah, sorry for the wording I meant admin not user. I think if the person
> > who configured sssd sees
> > 
> > Option numbers do not match (X != Y)
> > 
> > after startup he or she might think that there are only a certain number
> > of config options allowed and tries to figure out what's wrong with the
> > configuration.
> 
> I meant the admin as well.
> It must be tested before we ship the code. It's just a test to help
> developers, it should never happen in a release.
> 
> Simo.
> 
> 

ok, I give up :-)

ACK

bye,
Sumit



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list