pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: PCP Updates: Fix Bug #1035: PMCD Should Not Fail to Start if NSS Fai

To: PCP Mailing List <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: PCP Updates: Fix Bug #1035: PMCD Should Not Fail to Start if NSS Fails to Initialize
From: Dave Brolley <brolley@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 11:23:22 -0400
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <y0m7g7i8bx2.fsf@xxxxxxxx>
References: <53319A17.6060608@xxxxxxxxxx> <y0m7g7i8bx2.fsf@xxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
On 03/25/2014 12:45 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
Dave Brolley <brolley@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

commit b9d2adfa5ae7cc5d8ef8416bbf804736a40efda5
Author: Dave Brolley <brolley@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date:   Tue Mar 25 10:35:25 2014 -0400

     When NSS fails to initialize, pmcd should still start successfully.
[...]
Have you considered doing this at the pmcd/pmproxy.c level instead, so
that a bad rc from __pmSecureServerSetup is sent but tolerated
(instead of triggering DontStart())?  That way, the
__pmSecureServerSetup function doesn't lie about its success, which in
turn would later let us extend pmcd with a $PCP_SECURE_SOCKETS-like
option to *require* ssl?


Frank and I talked a bit more about this and he correctly noted that, with this change, __pmSecureServerSetup() no longer contains a code path which returns anything other than 0. He has suggested changing it to return 'void'. I believe that it is possible that someday, such an error path could once again exist (e.g. if we were to implement Frank's example of having a pmcd/pmproxy mode for which secure connections are required). In that case we would be removing the return code only to add it again later. Even though this is currently only used by pmcd and pmproxy, I think we should think twice about changing the API if we think it could change back in the future.

Thoughts?
Dave

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>