Bug 1458181
| Summary: | GSS-Proxy is not supported by this kernel | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Dominic Robinson <development-K9RvgheM1OmXW9pm> |
| Component: | gssproxy | Assignee: | Robbie Harwood <rharwood> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 25 | CC: | dustymabe, gdeschner, rharwood, ssorce |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | gssproxy-0.7.0-9.fc25 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2017-06-05 00:03:27 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: | |||
is this solved by https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-734c1c5226? If so, can we add this bug to that update? I suppose that's going to stop the service from failing, but it's still going to seek out the auth-rpcgss module due to the nfs-server configuration file; I presume it'll just fallback to the next mode. It will still lbe logging errors though. I don't see the errors any longer: ``` [root@cloudhost ~]# rpm -q gssproxy gssproxy-0.7.0-8.fc25.x86_64 [root@cloudhost ~]# journalctl -u gssproxy -- Logs begin at Fri 2017-06-02 14:33:24 UTC, end at Fri 2017-06-02 14:34:26 UTC. -- Jun 02 14:33:30 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Starting GSSAPI Proxy Daemon... Jun 02 14:33:30 localhost.localdomain gssproxy[809]: GSS-Proxy is not supported by this kernel since file /proc/net/rpc/use-gss-proxy could not be found: 2 (No such file or directory) Jun 02 14:33:30 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: gssproxy.service: Control process exited, code=exited status=1 Jun 02 14:33:30 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Failed to start GSSAPI Proxy Daemon. Jun 02 14:33:30 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: gssproxy.service: Unit entered failed state. Jun 02 14:33:30 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: gssproxy.service: Failed with result 'exit-code'. ``` ``` [root@cloudhost ~]# rpm -q gssproxy gssproxy-0.7.0-9.fc25.x86_64 [root@cloudhost ~]# journalctl -u gssproxy -- Logs begin at Fri 2017-06-02 13:57:04 UTC, end at Fri 2017-06-02 14:29:23 UTC. -- Jun 02 13:57:09 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Starting GSSAPI Proxy Daemon... Jun 02 13:57:09 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Started GSSAPI Proxy Daemon. ``` Also, if possible can we mobilize and get some testing against the update [1] today and get it enough karma to make it into stable. We can't release the next version of Fedora Atomic Host with the systemd unit failure on startup. [1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-734c1c5226 I can confirm gssproxy-0.7.0-9 (f25/f26) has been released exactly to address his problem, in fact it is the only problem addressed by release 9. Robbie, do we have a Fedora bugzilla for gssproxy-0.7.0-9 ? If so can you lin it here and in the update ? Otherwise perhaps we should link this bug to the update ? gssproxy-0.7.0-9.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-734c1c5226 Done. Thanks! gssproxy-0.7.0-9.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-c15bb90a4f gssproxy-0.7.0-9.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-734c1c5226 gssproxy-0.7.0-9.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-c15bb90a4f gssproxy-0.7.0-9.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. gssproxy-0.7.0-9.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |
Description of problem: Installing the standard environment group installs nfs-utils - which adds a configuration file named 24-nfs-server.conf which on a minimal installations causes the gssproxy service to fail. The reason for this failure is: "GSS-Proxy is not supported by this kernel since file /proc/net/rpc/use-gss-proxy could not be found" . Ofcourse the cited kernel module wont be loaded unless you have configured Kerberos: ● auth-rpcgss-module.service - Kernel Module supporting RPCSEC_GSS Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/auth-rpcgss-module.service; static; v Active: inactive (dead) Condition: start condition failed at Fri 2017-06-02 08:55:26 BST; 46min ago └─ ConditionPathExists=/etc/krb5.keytab was not met There used to be a snippet in the the spec for gssproxy to delete that file - but it has been removed in the 0.8 relase, causing this failure: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/gssproxy.git/commit/?id=c1f4665d37a3e70c8de33f3d06d36999206b950a Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): gssproxy-0.7.0-8.fc25 How reproducible: Using the above version/release - very. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install a minimal Fedora 25 env - update to the latest kernel and then reboot. 2. dnf -y groupinstall @standard && reboot 3. systemctl status gssproxy Actual results: gssproxy.service fails Expected results: gssproxy.service does not depend on the auth-rpcgss module and therefore starts. Additional info: I install Fedora from a chroot environment and therefore in order to reproduce the above, you might have to do the install via the netinst media to achieve the same combination of package versions.