[SSSD] sss_cache flush ssh hosts list.

Pavel Reichl preichl at redhat.com
Fri Aug 29 07:53:55 UTC 2014


Because Jakubs' message came after I started to write my message and I didn't read it till I posted mine.

Still the discussion was between you and me, so it would be more discussion friendly if you at least had writen that you share Jakubs' concerns (which are valid from my POV but I'm not sure they beat my arguments).

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lukas Slebodnik" <lslebodn at redhat.com>
To: "Development of the System Security Services Daemon" <sssd-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 11:02:46 PM
Subject: Re: [SSSD] sss_cache flush ssh hosts list.

On (28/08/14 19:19), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>
>On 08/28/2014 07:13 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>On (28/08/14 18:37), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>On 08/28/2014 06:24 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>>On (28/08/14 18:11), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>>On 08/25/2014 02:05 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>>>>>Dne 4.8.2014 v 19:34 Pavel Reichl napsal(a):
>>>>>>>On 07/21/2014 02:08 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>>>>>On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 01:55:20PM +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>>>>>>>>On 18.7.2014 06:41, William wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>Ignore that last patch, I messed up and didn't include a .h file.
>>>>>>>>>>>>Here
>>>>>>>>>>>>is the fixed patch.
>>>>>>>>>>>This new patch seems to be based on some older version of the
>>>>>>>>>>>patch, it
>>>>>>>>>>>uses wrong option name, sysdb_update_ssh_host still has the confdb
>>>>>>>>>>>argument, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Fixed, and fixed the documentation into the xml file, removed the
>>>>>>>>>>references to the .pot file.
>>>>>>>>>I don't see any of the requested fixes in the patch.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>See attachment for fixed patch. I also did a few additional tweaks to
>>>>>>>>>make
>>>>>>>>>the patch work when SSSD is updated from a previous version and when
>>>>>>>>>building without SSH bits.
>>>>>>>>Awesome thank you, I guess some of us need to review the patch now
>>>>>>>>you're also an author.
>>>>>>>While Jan was so kind to give me some hints on how to test patch
>>>>>>>properly, we found out a little bug. So Jan is going to  prepare an
>>>>>>>updated patch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'll do the review then.
>>>>>>I can't reproduce the issue, maybe something else was wrong in your setup?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>For the record, I installed IPA in a VM and then ran these commands on it:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>$ sss_ssh_knownhostsproxy --debug 10 $HOSTNAME
>>>>>>[no errors]
>>>>>>$ cat /var/lib/sss/pubconf/known_hosts
>>>>>>[not empty]
>>>>>># systemctl stop ipa
>>>>>>$ sss_ssh_knownhostsproxy --debug 10 $HOSTNAME
>>>>>>[no errors]
>>>>>>$ cat /var/lib/sss/pubconf/known_hosts
>>>>>>[not empty]
>>>>>># sss_cache -H
>>>>>>$ sss_ssh_knownhostsproxy --debug 10 $HOSTNAME
>>>>>>[no errors]
>>>>>>$ cat /var/lib/sss/pubconf/known_hosts
>>>>>>[empty]
>>>>>># systemctl start ipa
>>>>>>$ sss_ssh_knownhostsproxy --debug 10 $HOSTNAME
>>>>>>[no errors]
>>>>>>$ cat /var/lib/sss/pubconf/known_hosts
>>>>>>[not empty]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Pavel had an empty /var/lib/sss/pubconf/known_hosts in the last step, I
>>>>>>have it non-empty as expected.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>(sorry for the delay, I was on leave)
>>>>>>
>>>>>This test ran OK this time, so I think you are right.
>>>>>
>>>>>I have some comments to the patch itself.
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm not personally fan of big patches like this one. Could you at least
>>>>>separate the man page changes to separate patch - so we can ask some native
>>>>>speaker to review it.
>>>>I am not big fan of splitting patches just for "man page changes"
>>>>
>>>>LS
>>>I like small patches, each doing one think and one think only. But I know I
>>>can't get always what I want.
>>>
>>>Still I believe that it would be a good policy to have man page updates in
>>>separate patch as we already have policy to ask native speaker to do review
>>>such changes. I think, it's a way more convenient for reviewer not to have
>>>search through the patch for man page changes and as a bonus he gets
>>>reviewed-by achievement.  :-)
>>>
>>>What are you reasons not to have separate patch?
>>>
>>https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/sssd-devel/2014-August/021296.html
>>
>>LS
>I have read that already no need to link messages a few minutes old.
In this case, I don't understand why did you ask?
(no reply needed :-)

LS
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list