Brief:
We are running an environment where users' home directories are automounted based on information stored in an LDAP db. To avoid double-lookups (and increase performance and stability), we use the sssd daemon to cache login and automount information. I.e, the /etc/nsswitch.conf has 'automount: sss' as opposed to 'automount: ldap'.
Problem:
The autofs pkg in Linux Mint 14 is missing the 'lookup_sss.so' module (which autofs uses to obtain the automount information from the System Security Services Daemon/sssd.) This means that the entire sssd integration with autofs is unable to function properly.
Since this looks like an oversight; I am reporting this issue as a bug in the hope of a quick upstream fix. Naturally, the Mint installation is not working very well without this functionality in place and maintaining custom packages for this task is not a good option.
Information Required for Inclusion In Main Proposal
====================================================
Availability:
SSSD is already in the Ubuntu universe, and builds successfully for the architectures it is designed to work on as required.
Rationale:
This package is essential for enterprise environments using automounted NFS home directories. Without it, there is no way to cache autofs maps leading to failed logins as autofs starts before networking is up.
The package is to be a new build dependency of a package that we already support (autofs). This resolves bug No. 1081489 comment No. 5 allowing sssd's autofs module to be built correctly.
Security:
The package has had 3 vulnerabilities discovered and patched in the last 18 months. Ubuntu uses the LTM (long-term maintenance) version of SSSD which is supported for longer than other releases with both fixes for important bugs and security patches. The Redhat security team are actively involved in fixing vulnerabilities in this package.
Quality assurance:
The package meets all of the following criteria as required except where noted below:
After installing the package it must be possible to make it working with a reasonable effort of configuration and documentation reading.
The package must not ask debconf questions higher than medium if it is going to be installed by default. The debconf questions must have reasonable defaults.
The status of important bugs in Debian's, Ubuntu's, and upstream's bug tracking systems must be evaluated. Links to these bug trackers need to be provided in the MIR report. Important bugs must be pointed out and discussed in the MIR report.
The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu (check out the Debian PTS)
The package should not deal with exotic hardware which we cannot support.
If the package ships a test suite, and there is no obvious reason why it cannot work during build (e. g. it needs root privileges or network access), it should be run during package build, and a failing test suite should fail the build.
The package uses a debian/watch file whenever possible. In cases where this is not possible (e. g. native packages), the package should either provide a debian/README.source file or a debian/watch file (with comments only) providing clear instructions on how to generate the source tar file.
***There are no long-term outstanding bugs which affect the usability of the program to a major degree. To support a package, we must be reasonably convinced that upstream supports and cares for the package.***
There is a long-term oustanding bug, i.e. autofs caching doesn't work... however the promotion to main and the patch provided in comment no. 3 will fix this!
UI standards:
N/A for this package
Dependencies:
*** NOT All build and binary dependencies (including Recommends:) are satisfiable in main *** libdhash1 and libsss-idmap0 required - see comment no. 12
Standards compliance:
Package is already present in Universe so should meet the FHS and Debian Policy standards.
Maintenance:
SSSD is well maintained with a clear maintenance policy from Redhat and the long term maintenance version is that already used in Ubuntu ensuring longevity of security updates and fixes.
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better.
It doesn't seem likely to me that Ubuntu could have introduced this bug in the delta against Debian, so it would be best to verify and file a bug in Debian.
Alternatively, patches welcome!