This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: timeout in LDAP access
- From: Denis Excoffier <cygwin at Denis-Excoffier dot org>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 20:51:23 +0200
- Subject: Re: timeout in LDAP access
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20140707110714 dot GJ1803 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <19B9F8D8-7FD6-4A7B-AC83-BBF8D152319D at Denis-Excoffier dot org> <20140709101256 dot GD26447 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <BA09D7D8-96E6-431F-9434-8BA8A2AB4952 at Denis-Excoffier dot org> <20140714095107 dot GB10401 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <20140714134836 dot GA2637 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <79A8CE40-E412-4479-B058-378823313FA8 at Denis-Excoffier dot org> <20140716135151 dot GC8520 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <4457DF49-B4C7-4A7C-A189-AB6F4D94794E at Denis-Excoffier dot org> <20140718191819 dot GH15332 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <20140728092148 dot GB25860 at calimero dot vinschen dot de>
On 2014-07-28 11:21, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> Ping?
>
> On Jul 18 21:18, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>
>> We really should do that to avoid collisions with system accounts, IMHO.
>>
>> But maybe we should handle it as a border case of a border case, and
>> reliably. Rather than using the default fake mechanism, what if
>> we use default offsets for the two cases:
>>
>> Case 1: posix offset is < 0x100000 ==> Enforce posix 0ffset 0xfe80000
>> Case 2: posix offset can't be fetched (this points to a local user
>> having no access to this kind of domain information)
>> ==> Enforce posix offset 0xfe000000.
>>
>> This would result in potential collisions in very rare border cases,
>> but it would result in reliable mappings throught all processes.
>> And, the complexity would be quite small.
>
> any feedback on this one? Shall I create a snapshot with a matching
> patch?
I have nothing to add except that i am a great fan of cygwin snapshots in
general, and i suppose that if several posix offsets are set to 0, it is
a minor problem if all of them get replaced by the same 0xfe80000.
Regards,
Denis Excoffier.
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple