Bug 1451349

Summary:	[ceph-container]: osd process group should be "ceph" inside container and /etc/ceph owner should be ceph:ceph
Product:	[Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Ceph Storage	Reporter:	shylesh <shmohan>
Component:	Container	Assignee:	Sébastien Han <shan>
Status:	CLOSED DEFERRED	QA Contact:	shylesh <shmohan>
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:	Erin Donnelly <edonnell>
Priority:	low
Version:	2.3	CC:	dang, edonnell, flucifre, gmeno, hchen, hnallurv, jim.curtis, pprakash, seb, shan, shmohan, uboppana
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	2.*
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Known Issue
Doc Text:	.The container image has incorrect owner and group IDs In the Red Hat Ceph Storage container image, the owner and group IDs for some processes are incorrect. The group ID of the `ceph-osd` process is `disk` when it is supposed to be `ceph`. The owner and group IDs for the files `/etc/ceph/` `root:root` when they it is supposed to be `ceph:ceph`.	Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2019-01-23 13:54:03 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:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	1437916

Comment 2 seb 2017-05-16 13:14:38 UTC

Upstream PR: https://github.com/ceph/ceph-docker/pull/643

Comment 4 Federico Lucifredi 2017-06-02 20:18:07 UTC

+1 to Seb's suggestion to move to 2.4

Comment 12 seb 2017-06-15 13:42:15 UTC

LGTM :)

Comment 13 seb 2017-06-30 14:11:33 UTC

Discussed that with Sage and 'disk' seems to be fine, so I'm putting this on the side for now.

Comment 14 Christina Meno 2017-12-12 14:17:56 UTC

Seb,

Looks like this issue is in POST due to https://github.com/ceph/ceph-container/pull/616
would you please confirm ?

Comment 15 Sébastien Han 2017-12-15 19:17:21 UTC

According to my Comment 13rd, I think we should close this as I checked with Sage and current permissions are fine. So this won't be implemented.
Thanks.

Comment 16 Yaniv Kaul 2019-01-23 13:54:03 UTC

(In reply to leseb from comment #15)
> According to my Comment 13rd, I think we should close this as I checked with
> Sage and current permissions are fine. So this won't be implemented.
> Thanks.

Closing.