Re: [HTCondor-users] authz rule inconsistency

[Zachary Miller <zmiller@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 01:44:26PM +0200, Pek Daniel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Based on my conversation with Brian, I thought that SCHEDD.ALLOW_NEGOTIATOR
> and ALLOW_NEGOTIATOR_SCHEDD are different notations for the very same thing
> (aka. "synonyms").
> 
> However, it seems not to be the case. Could somebody explain what's going
> on?

In case 1 and 2, an empty value for ALLOW_NEGOTIATOR_SCHEDD is being picked up
and used, and ALLOW_NEGOTIATOR and SCHEDD.ALLOW_NEGOTIATOR are being ignored.
This seems broken to me as well.  (I have a hunch about how that happened.)

I suspect it will say, "Not defined" but what do you get from the command:
  condor_config_val -verbose ALLOW_NEGOTIATOR_SCHEDD
?

In any case, for now, use ALLOW_NEGOTIATOR_SCHEDD for your definition.  Once
again, I'll need to investigate the source code a little and will create a
ticket when I know more.


Cheers,
-zach