Bug 785871

Summary:	wrong build dependency on nscd
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6	Reporter:	Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh>
Component:	sssd	Assignee:	Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	IDM QE LIST <seceng-idm-qe-list>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	6.3	CC:	apeetham, grajaiya, jgalipea, prc
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	sssd-1.8.0-5.el6	Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:	No technical note required	Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2012-06-20 11:54:13 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:

Description Stephen Gallagher 2012-01-30 20:01:47 UTC

This bug is created as a clone of upstream ticket:
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1129

We currently have a build dependency on nscd in the contributed spec file.
That's because we use a configure script to find nscd binaries locations.

We should keep the configure check and use it to locate binaries. But we shouldn't have ifdefs in the code. The nscd presence is basically a runtime check, as we do not have a hard depdnency on nscd otherwise.

So when configure checks fails we should simply use a reasonable default settable by a configure switch.

This will allow us to eliminate the BuildRequires on nscd

Comment 1 Jenny Severance 2012-02-24 15:33:58 UTC

verify Sanity Only, does not after RHEL delivered rpms

Comment 2 Jenny Severance 2012-02-24 15:34:22 UTC

s/affect/after/

Comment 5 Stephen Gallagher 2012-04-10 16:51:35 UTC

    Technical note added. If any revisions are required, please edit the "Technical Notes" field
    accordingly. All revisions will be proofread by the Engineering Content Services team.
    
    New Contents:
No technical note required

Comment 6 Amith 2012-05-29 15:08:11 UTC

Verified on sssd-1.8.0-28.el6.
This bug has been verified sanity only and no related regressions detected.

Comment 8 errata-xmlrpc 2012-06-20 11:54:13 UTC

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-0747.html