Bug 1533644

Summary:	RFE: Make _NSSUTIL_EvaluateConfigDir (or something like it) public
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Rob Crittenden <rcritten>
Component:	nss	Assignee:	Bob Relyea <rrelyea>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	dueno, elio.maldonado.batiz, kdudka
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Triaged
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2021-11-03 17:53:07 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:	1533368

Description Rob Crittenden 2018-01-11 21:08:46 UTC

Description of problem:

The switch to sqlite as the default NSS database format in rawhide/F-28 is making dealing with existing legacy databases rather complicate. Not everyone can or will update automatically and this is going to cause databases to not be found and generally cause confusion.

NSS has a function to find the current database in a given directory, prioritizing sqlite over dbm but it is a private function in nss/lib/util/utilpars.c

This needs to be made public so consumers don't have to re-invent the wheel or copy wholesale out of the NSS tree.

This is causing issues in both certmonger and mod_nss, neither of which try to automatically figure out which database style to use, instead leaving it up to the user. Unfortunately no prefix was previously set so it always looks for the default, now changed, and fails horribly.

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

nss-3.34.0-1.0.fc27.x86_64

Comment 2 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2021-01-26 12:07:35 UTC

This package has changed maintainer in Fedora. Reassigning to the new maintainer of this component.

Comment 3 Bob Relyea 2021-11-03 16:30:23 UTC

Sigh, Rob, now that dbm has been removed, is this still needed? You are right, it should have happened years ago and it was an easy fix. I'll open an upstream bug if you still need it.

Comment 4 Rob Crittenden 2021-11-03 17:53:07 UTC

I think that most packages that needed to make the distinction rolled their own solution by now (mine did anyway).

I'm going to close this because, as you point out, it isn't particularly relevant any more now that dbm is finally deprecated. It's a good thing. We've wanted people off dbm for a very, very long time.