On 18 May 2017 at 15:04, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 05/18/2017 09:41 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
>> On 18 May 2017 at 14:33, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>> That's a perfectly reasonable request. I think it's fair to say that if no
>>> central user management is required, it's reasonable that our de
On 05/18/2017 09:41 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> On 18 May 2017 at 14:33, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> That's a perfectly reasonable request. I think it's fair to say that if no
>> central user management is required, it's reasonable that our default would
>> be
>> to drop 'sss' from nsswitch.conf a
On 18 May 2017 at 14:33, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 05/18/2017 09:24 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 08:20:49AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
Yes, authconfig is *not* a good tool for managing centralized
On 05/18/2017 09:24 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 08:20:49AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>>> Yes, authconfig is *not* a good tool for managing centralized authentication
>>> services and its upstream has been u
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 08:20:49AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> Yes, authconfig is *not* a good tool for managing centralized authentication
>> services and its upstream has been unable to keep up with the changing needs
>> of
>> the s
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 08:20:49AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 05/16/2017 07:04 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Stephen Gallagher
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 05/15/2017 11:30 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 05:22:14PM +0200, Tomas
On 16/05/17 14:20, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> apparently *designed* with philosophy much like that of systemd. It's
>> supposed to be a unified set of tools replacing a lot of already
>> existing functionality, and adding some useful features.
>> Unfortunately, its unifying multiple service and mu
On 05/16/2017 07:04 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 05/15/2017 11:30 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 05:22:14PM +0200, Tomas Mraz wrote:
>
The questions still hold for the consistency between passwd
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>
> On 05/15/2017 11:30 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 05:22:14PM +0200, Tomas Mraz wrote:
>>> The questions still hold for the consistency between passwd and shadow
>>> and also for the systemd module present.
>> Si
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 05:57:50PM +0200, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> On 15 May 2017 at 17:35, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Tomasz, your tone is needlessly hostile. If you have a question, ask it. If
> > you want to make a suggestion, make it. But casting aspersions on people
> > doing work is unacc
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 05:57:50PM +0200, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> In this context implementing in sssd any caching infrastructure is
> more like idiotic than well justified (technically) move.
Ok, look. You've been warned on this before. You are now on moderation
on this list. You're welcome to co
On 15 May 2017 at 17:35, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Tomasz, your tone is needlessly hostile. If you have a question, ask it. If
> you want to make a suggestion, make it. But casting aspersions on people
> doing work is unacceptable.
Just please read my question straight. What I've wrote it is v
On 05/15/2017 11:30 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 05:22:14PM +0200, Tomas Mraz wrote:
>> On Mon, 2017-05-15 at 17:15 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 04:35:56PM +0200, Tomas Mraz wrote:
My current Fedora 26 default nsswitch.conf contains these lines:
On 05/15/2017 11:28 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> On 15 May 2017 at 17:15, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> This change proposes leveraging a new "files" provider SSSD will ship in
>> the next version in order to resolve also users from the local files.
>> That way, the "sss" NSS module can be configured be
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 05:22:14PM +0200, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-05-15 at 17:15 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 04:35:56PM +0200, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> > > My current Fedora 26 default nsswitch.conf contains these lines:
> > >
> > > passwd: sss files systemd
> >
On 15 May 2017 at 17:15, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> This change proposes leveraging a new "files" provider SSSD will ship in
> the next version in order to resolve also users from the local files.
> That way, the "sss" NSS module can be configured before the files module
> in nsswitch.conf and the syst
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 04:35:56PM +0200, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> My current Fedora 26 default nsswitch.conf contains these lines:
>
> passwd: sss files systemd
> shadow: files sss
> group: sss files systemd
>
> * Where is the consistency?
> * Where is the Fedora Change page that tal
On Mon, 2017-05-15 at 17:15 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 04:35:56PM +0200, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> > My current Fedora 26 default nsswitch.conf contains these lines:
> >
> > passwd: sss files systemd
> > shadow: files sss
> > group: sss files systemd
> >
> > Not
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 04:35:56PM +0200, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> My current Fedora 26 default nsswitch.conf contains these lines:
>
> passwd: sss files systemd
> shadow: files sss
> group: sss files systemd
>
> Not sure which package created this configuration, but:
>
> * Where is t
My current Fedora 26 default nsswitch.conf contains these lines:
passwd: sss files systemd
shadow: files sss
group: sss files systemd
Not sure which package created this configuration, but:
* Where is the consistency?
* Where is the Fedora Change page that talks about these modi
20 matches
Mail list logo
