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-modulesAssignee: Jan Synacek <jsynacek>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: BaseOS QE Security Team <qe-baseos-security>
Severity: high Docs Contact:
Priority: urgent    
Version: 6.4CC: gliu
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: 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:
Embargoed:

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.