On 17.06.2013 20:44, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> On 06/05/2013 03:37 PM, Stef Walter wrote:
>
>> What does work, and has been tested is logging in as root and simply
>> typing this:
>>
>> realm join mydomain.com
>
> I filed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975182 because of
> confusing
On 06/05/2013 03:37 PM, Stef Walter wrote:
What does work, and has been tested is logging in as root and simply
typing this:
realm join mydomain.com
I filed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975182 because of
confusing error messages when there is no pre-existing AD computer acct:
On 17.06.2013 13:22, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-06-11 at 07:47 +0200, Stef Walter wrote:
>>> even special locations for *particularly* braindamaged applications
>>> (pidgin).
>>
>> Hmmm, we should probably fix that one to use the central stuff. David,
>> if we've missed any others in Fed
On Tue, 2013-06-11 at 07:47 +0200, Stef Walter wrote:
> > even special locations for *particularly* braindamaged applications
> > (pidgin).
>
> Hmmm, we should probably fix that one to use the central stuff. David,
> if we've missed any others in Fedora 19, could you file RHBZ bugs?
I will, yes.
On 10.06.2013 23:35, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-06-09 at 09:24 +0930, Glen Turner wrote:
>>
>> I'd also strongly encourage a design which makes it easy for a
>> corporate-issued RPM to configure the authentication. For an example of
>> something wonderful, NetworkManager has a one-file-p
On Sun, 2013-06-09 at 09:24 +0930, Glen Turner wrote:
>
> I'd also strongly encourage a design which makes it easy for a
> corporate-issued RPM to configure the authentication. For an example of
> something wonderful, NetworkManager has a one-file-per-ssid design so its
> easy for a RPM to drop in
On Sun, 2013-06-09 at 09:24 +0930, Glen Turner wrote:
> Kickstart is fine for centrally managed devices. They've got experienced
> sysadmins who don't mind getting dirty with configuration files.
>
> The real kicker is people who manage their own device: not just BYOD
> but also part-time sysadmin
Kickstart is fine for centrally managed devices. They've got experienced
sysadmins who don't mind getting dirty with configuration files.
The real kicker is people who manage their own device: not just BYOD
but also part-time sysadmins who can't run the corporate distribution.
These people can suc
On 04.06.2013 17:44, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 10:26 -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
>
>> For what it's worth, remote authentication is increasingly important
>> where I sit, so everything that makes it easier to set up is welcome. As
>> of now, my cheat sheet for older Fedo
On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 21:22 +0200, Stef Walter wrote:
> > So the endgame here is that there will be no remote authentication
> > option in anaconda *nor* in firstboot.
>
> Is it really gone from firstboot?
firstboot does not exist any more. There are two replacements in F19.
'initial-setup' is
On 05.06.2013 17:38, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 16:55 +0200, Stef Walter wrote:
>> On 04.06.2013 15:34, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 09:02 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2013 09:07 PM, Adam Wil
On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 16:55 +0200, Stef Walter wrote:
> On 04.06.2013 15:34, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 09:02 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> On 06/03/2013 09:07 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >>> We all know what deve
On 04.06.2013 15:34, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 09:02 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 06/03/2013 09:07 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> We all know what devel@ does best, so let's fire up the power of
>>> the bikeshedding mac
On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 10:26 -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> For what it's worth, remote authentication is increasingly important
> where I sit, so everything that makes it easier to set up is welcome. As
> of now, my cheat sheet for older Fedoras and RHEL is several pages long
> and involves
On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 08:43 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 18:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > We all know what devel@ does best, so let's fire up the power of the
> > bikeshedding machine :)
> >
> > We had https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=965883 on the list of
> >
On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 10:06 +0300, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 18:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Whether this is a blocker or not comes down to a judgement call, because
> > it hinges on whether this is a significant inconvenience for a large
> > enough number of users. So
On 06/04/2013 10:28 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 06/04/2013 02:26 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
('winbind crashed with no error messages; restart it; oops crashed
again; restart samba maybe; YAY, success, don't touch anything')
Pre systemd winbind/samba migration or after systemd winbi
On 06/04/2013 02:26 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
('winbind crashed with no error messages; restart it; oops crashed
again; restart samba maybe; YAY, success, don't touch anything')
Pre systemd winbind/samba migration or after systemd winbind/migration (
which means we might need to fix somethi
On 06/03/2013 09:07 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
We all know what devel@ does best, so let's fire up the power of the
bikeshedding machine :)
We had https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=965883 on the list of
release blocker candidates that we evaluated at the blocker review
meeting this mor
On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 09:02 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 06/03/2013 09:07 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > We all know what devel@ does best, so let's fire up the power of
> > the bikeshedding machine :)
> >
> > We had https://bugzilla.red
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2013 09:07 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> We all know what devel@ does best, so let's fire up the power of
> the bikeshedding machine :)
>
> We had https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=965883 on the
> list of release blocker candidates t
On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 09:19 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > Basically, we (as in, the people who do blocker review) need to know if
> > remote auth at install/firstboot time is really important. Once we know
> > that, we can go out and get the blocker decisions against anaconda, i-s,
> > g-i-s, wh
On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 18:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> We all know what devel@ does best, so let's fire up the power of the
> bikeshedding machine :)
>
> We had https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=965883 on the list of
> release blocker candidates that we evaluated at the blocker revi
On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 21:53 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 18:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > As things stand, in Fedora 19, it's basically impossible to configure
> > remote authentication from the install/firstboot process. If you want to
> > use remote auth, you'd
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 18:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> Whether this is a blocker or not comes down to a judgement call, because
>> it hinges on whether this is a significant inconvenience for a large
>> enough number of users. So we ne
> Basically, we (as in, the people who do blocker review) need to know if
> remote auth at install/firstboot time is really important. Once we know
> that, we can go out and get the blocker decisions against anaconda, i-s,
> g-i-s, whatever else correct. Just trust us, and answer the initial
> ques
On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 18:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Whether this is a blocker or not comes down to a judgement call, because
> it hinges on whether this is a significant inconvenience for a large
> enough number of users. So we need to know from people who use Fedora in
> remote auth enviro
On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 06:07:59PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Whether this is a blocker or not comes down to a judgement call, because
> it hinges on whether this is a significant inconvenience for a large
> enough number of users. So we need to know from people who use Fedora in
> remote aut
Don't mess with teachers. They have tenure.
:-)
From: Adam Williamson
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 7:04 PM
Subject: Re: Call for Bikeshedding: remote auth at install time
On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 19:02
On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 19:02 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> But yes, in F19 Beta it was broken in g-i-s too, but soon it should not
> be. But we have a fully-supported paths...
excuse me just one second, I hear the doorbell...
...
oh, dear. It seems to be my high school English teacher, holding
On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 21:53 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 18:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > As things stand, in Fedora 19, it's basically impossible to configure
> > remote authentication from the install/firstboot process. If you want to
> > use remote auth, you'd
On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 18:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> As things stand, in Fedora 19, it's basically impossible to configure
> remote authentication from the install/firstboot process. If you want to
> use remote auth, you'd have to create a local user first and then do it
> using whatever to
32 matches
Mail list logo
