Bug 1139006
| Summary: | The MODULE_CONF directive is not onorated | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Goffredo Baroncelli <kreijack> |
| Component: | dkms | Assignee: | Simone Caronni <negativo17> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 21 | CC: | charles_rose, mario_limonciello, negativo17, tcallawa |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | dkms-2.2.0.3-26.el7 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2014-09-23 04:25:11 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: | |||
Thanks very much for spotting and providing the fix. DKMS is unmaintained upstream. Are you a packager already? Would you like to become comaintainer for DKMS in Fedora/EPEL? dkms-2.2.0.3-26.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dkms-2.2.0.3-26.el5 dkms-2.2.0.3-26.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dkms-2.2.0.3-26.el6 dkms-2.2.0.3-26.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dkms-2.2.0.3-26.el7 dkms-2.2.0.3-26.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dkms-2.2.0.3-26.fc19 dkms-2.2.0.3-26.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dkms-2.2.0.3-26.fc20 dkms-2.2.0.3-26.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dkms-2.2.0.3-26.fc21 Package dkms-2.2.0.3-26.el7: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=epel-testing dkms-2.2.0.3-26.el7' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2014-2501/dkms-2.2.0.3-26.el7 then log in and leave karma (feedback). dkms-2.2.0.3-26.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. dkms-2.2.0.3-26.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. dkms-2.2.0.3-26.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. dkms-2.2.0.3-26.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. dkms-2.2.0.3-26.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |
Description of problem: The MODULE_CONF directive is ignored at installing time Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): v2.2.0.3 How reproduce: Add a MODULE_CONF directive in the dkms.conf file, and you see that no file is udated under /etc/modprobe.d/<packagename>.conf Steps to Reproduce: 1) create an empty file /etc/modprobe.d/dkms.conf 2) create a test package 3) Add a MODULE_CONF directive in the test package dkms.conf file 4) install the test package Actual results: The directive is not inserted in the /etc/modprobe.d/dkms.conf Expected results: The directive should be inserted in the /etc/modprobe.d/dkms.conf Additional info: The root of the problem should be in the commit 13d61e8e744 - "Update bash syntax patch" [1], which changed a line in the function moduleconfig_update_obsoletes() as following [...] - [[ ${modules_conf_obsoletes[@]} ]] || return 0 -+ [[ "${modules_conf_obsoletes[*]}" ]] || return 0 ++ IFS=; [[ "${modules_conf_obsoletes[*]}" ]] || return 0 [...] Unfortunately if the test fails, the IFS variable is set to ''. This leads the rest of the code runs wrongly. A solution I suggest to protect the code by '( )': - [[ ${modules_conf_obsoletes[@]} ]] || return 0 -+ IFS=; [[ "${modules_conf_obsoletes[*]}" ]] || return 0 ++ ( IFS=; [[ "${modules_conf_obsoletes[*]}" ]] ) || return 0 The severity is high because this change may break existing installation [1] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/dkms.git/commit/dkms-bash-syntax-fix.patch?h=f21&id=13d61e8e744d92d254cb722fd3e4c30891f481c8