[SSSD] [PATCHES] Specfile updates (one urgent)

Lukas Slebodnik lslebodn at redhat.com
Tue Jul 2 13:05:14 UTC 2013


On (02/07/13 08:28), Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>On 07/02/2013 03:54 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (01/07/13 12:48), Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>> Patch 0001: Move pre and post scripts to sssd-common When we
>>> switched to making 'sssd' a meta-package, we forgot to move the
>>> upgrade scripts into the sssd-common package. This means that 
>>> updates won't work right without the 'sssd' package and that
>>> removing the meta-package (i.e. to trim down requirements) will
>>> remove SSSD from the services lists.
>> Each scriptlet section contain command systemctl with argument
>> daemon-reload or disable (or chkconfig (sysv)). Those actions are
>> related to service file and sssd.service is in package
>> sssd-common. post, preun and postun should not be run with "meta"
>> package sssd and definitely must be run with sssd-common.
>> 
>> But I have a question. Model situation: package sssd is installed
>> and configured only with ipa. sssd is connected to ipa server.
>> Someone removes sssd-ad subpackage, in this case, it does not make
>> sense to restart sssd. Someone remove sssd-ipa. Should sssd be
>> restarted?
>> 
>> I am not sure if this model situation make sense, but users can do
>> any mistake.
>> 
>
>
>First off: just so we're clear, with these patches, SSSD is only
>restarted when the sssd-common package is upgraded (and it's not
>started automatically on initial install either). It is not started if
>any other subpackage is added or removed. This is intentional, because
>any change of that nature should obviously be associated with a change
>to sssd.conf, which will necessitate a manual restart of SSSD in any case.
>
>Additionally, because of the way that we list the dependencies, it's
>not possible for sssd-[provider] to be updated without sssd-common
>also being updated to match.
>
>So I'd say that this is a non-issue. If someone is relying on a
>provider and removes it, they've made a conscious decision to screw
>something up. I don't think it makes any sense to code around that.
>
>
OK.
I should not be so paranoid.

ACK to both patches.

LS



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list