Bug 1003218

Summary:	environment-modules versions less than v3.2.10 are buggy
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6	Reporter:	Fotis Georgatos <fotis>
Component:	environment-modules	Assignee:	Jan Synacek <jsynacek>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	BaseOS QE Security Team <qe-baseos-security>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	urgent
Version:	6.4	CC:	gliu
Target Milestone:	rc	Keywords:	Reopened
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	All
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2013-11-26 10:52:08 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:

Description Fotis Georgatos 2013-08-31 23:22:31 UTC

Description of problem:
environment-modules releases less than v3.2.10 are buggy. 
This is same exact case like (now resolved for epel5):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=997946

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:
Solution same as:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-11238/environment-modules-3.2.10-1.el5

Comment 1 Orion Poplawski 2013-08-31 23:37:54 UTC

environment-modules is in RHEL6, not EPEL6.

Comment 2 Jan Synacek 2013-09-02 12:07:42 UTC


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 976369 ***

Comment 3 Fotis Georgatos 2013-11-25 17:27:31 UTC

Please **open a support case via RedHat's Customer Portal** for your organization,
if you are impacted by this; this is what will escalate the priority.
(fi. Uni.Lu request is via https://access.redhat.com/support/cases/00987366/)

Comment 4 Fotis Georgatos 2013-11-26 10:09:56 UTC

reopening this issue...

Comment 6 Jan Synacek 2013-11-26 10:52:08 UTC

(In reply to Fotis Georgatos from comment #4)
> reopening this issue...

Why? I marked it as a duplicate for a reason... And you put it in MODIFIED, which is wrong.

Please, use bug #976369.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 976369 ***

Comment 7 Fotis Georgatos 2014-03-26 09:11:29 UTC

after addressing #1076072, this issue should likely be considered as handled OK.