fixes #81 #80: remove dependency on dcache-auth #82
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Can one of the admins verify this patch? |
JimSermersheim
force-pushed
the
dcache-auth-divorce
branch
from
35261e9
to
fcb5fc4
Compare
| _subject = buildUnixSubject(_uid, _gid, _gids); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private Subject buildUnixSubject(int uid, int gid, int[] gids) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It seems that this can be made static
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, I can update the patch with that change. It may be a day or so before I get to it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
force-pushed ec7ce13 with suggested change from @rumpelstiltzkin
|
ok to test |
1 similar comment
|
ok to test |
|
@JimSermersheim do want to comment on remark from @rumpelstiltzkin? |
JimSermersheim
force-pushed
the
dcache-auth-divorce
branch
from
fcb5fc4
to
ec7ce13
Compare
kofemann
reviewed
Jun 7, 2019
| _subject = buildUnixSubject(_uid, _gid, _gids); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private Subject static buildUnixSubject(int uid, int gid, int[] gids) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
static must be before return type:
private static Subject buildUnixSubject(...)
kofemann
requested changes
Jun 7, 2019
|
It needs to compile as well? Such demands.
On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 12:32 AM, Tiramisu Mokka<notifications@github.com> wrote:
@kofemann commented on this pull request.
In oncrpc4j-core/src/main/java/org/dcache/oncrpc4j/rpc/RpcAuthTypeUnix.java:
@@ -70,7 +73,18 @@ public void xdrDecode(XdrDecodingStream xdr) throws OncRpcException, IOException
_gids = xdr.xdrDecodeIntVector();
_verifier.xdrDecode(xdr);
- _subject = Subjects.of(_uid, _gid, _gids);
+ _subject = buildUnixSubject(_uid, _gid, _gids);
+ }
+
+ private Subject static buildUnixSubject(int uid, int gid, int[] gids) {
static must be before return type:
private static Subject buildUnixSubject(...)
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
JimSermersheim
force-pushed
the
dcache-auth-divorce
branch
from
ec7ce13
to
c3ac2fc
Compare
kofemann
approved these changes
Jun 7, 2019
|
Yes, life is hard.... And compilation still fails.... |
Signed-off-by: Jim Sermersheim <jim_sermersheim@yahoo.com>
JimSermersheim
force-pushed
the
dcache-auth-divorce
branch
from
c3ac2fc
to
b818a03
Compare
|
Well, at least that one wasn't due to my stupidity.
Next prob: I can't see how my changes caused this UT Error
org.dcache.oncrpc4j.rpc.OncRpcAcceptedException: GARBAGE_ARGS
at org.dcache.oncrpc4j.rpc.RpcProtocolFilter.handleRead(RpcProtocolFilter.java:85)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.ExecutorResolver$9.execute(ExecutorResolver.java:119)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.executeFilter(DefaultFilterChain.java:284)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.executeChainPart(DefaultFilterChain.java:201)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.execute(DefaultFilterChain.java:133)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.process(DefaultFilterChain.java:112)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.ProcessorExecutor.execute(ProcessorExecutor.java:77)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.nio.transport.TCPNIOTransport.fireIOEvent(TCPNIOTransport.java:539)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.strategies.AbstractIOStrategy.fireIOEvent(AbstractIOStrategy.java:112)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.strategies.SameThreadIOStrategy.executeIoEvent(SameThreadIOStrategy.java:103)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.strategies.AbstractIOStrategy.executeIoEvent(AbstractIOStrategy.java:89)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.nio.SelectorRunner.iterateKeyEvents(SelectorRunner.java:415)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.nio.SelectorRunner.iterateKeys(SelectorRunner.java:384)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.nio.SelectorRunner.doSelect(SelectorRunner.java:348)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.nio.SelectorRunner.run(SelectorRunner.java:279)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.threadpool.AbstractThreadPool$Worker.doWork(AbstractThreadPool.java:593)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.threadpool.AbstractThreadPool$Worker.run(AbstractThreadPool.java:573)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)
|
|
yes, this one I am trying to fix. |
|
cherry-picked and merged with adjusted commit message as 9f8fde0. Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@kofemann, here's a stab at the changes I figured you intended for #81
Sorry about the whitespace and import sorting noise (over-eager IDE)