Bug 101770

Summary: rhnpush fails with kerberized account
Product: Red Hat Satellite 5 Reporter: Jason Verch <jason.verch>
Component: ServerAssignee: Mihai Ibanescu <mihai.ibanescu>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: Red Hat Satellite QA List <satqe-list>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: unspecifiedCC: rhn-bugs
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: i386   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2004-04-05 20:47:29 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 99546    

Description Jason Verch 2003-08-06 16:57:43 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; CPT-IE401SP1; 
Q312461; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)

Description of problem:
We are using PAM authentication for kerberized RHN accounts. Everything works 
fine through the gui but rhnpush fails on the command line. I had to create 
myself a non PAM authenticated account as a workaround to use rhnpush.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
rhnpush-2.5.1-11

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. rhnpush
2. use kerberized (through PAM) account
3.
    

Actual Results:  Error Class Code: 2
Error Class Info: Invalid username and password combination.
Explanation: 
     An error has occurred while processing your request. If this problem
     persists please enter a bug report at bugzilla.redhat.com.
     If you choose to submit the bug report, please be sure to include
     details of what you were trying to do when this error occurred and
     details on how to reproduce this problem.


Expected Results:  upload new RPM to channel.

Additional info:

using an account with a RHN password instead of PAM authentication works as 
expected.

Comment 1 Mihai Ibanescu 2003-08-06 18:55:39 UTC
Code fixed.

Comment 4 Josef Komenda 2003-08-06 22:15:17 UTC
Looks good in the 2.0.1-10 satellite.

Comment 5 Greg DeKoenigsberg 2003-08-16 03:25:04 UTC
Since we actually got this into the rhn260sat release, and since it's already 
aligning underneath rhn260, I'm pulling it from rhn270.