Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||Recent glibc breaks nfs-utils (exportfs and mountd)|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Todd Mokros <tmokros>|
|Component:||nfs-utils||Assignee:||Steve Dickson <steved>|
|Status:||CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE||QA Contact:||Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>|
|Fixed In Version:||F8||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2008-11-26 12:36:33 EST||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:|
Description Todd Mokros 2007-08-15 22:25:16 EDT
Description of problem: It appears that a recent glibc update now enforces the requirement for a mode parameter for open calls with the O_CREAT flag set. nfs-utils support code defines a function xflock used by exportfs and mountd that calls open with O_CREAT but no mode parameter. This causes exportfs and mountd to dump core, with the error message: *** invalid open64 call: O_CREAT without mode ***:rpc.mountd terminated Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): nfs-utils-1.1.0-3.fc8 (i386) glibc-2.6.90-9 (i686) How reproducible: Everytime when attempting to start nfs with its init script Steps to Reproduce: 1. /etc/init.d/nfs restart 2. 3. Actual results: exportfs and rpc.mountd dump core Expected results: all nfs services should start Additional info: Patch attached that fixes the issue for me. Not sure what file access mode should be specified, but it Works For Me(tm) and allows all nfs daemons to start.
Comment 1 Todd Mokros 2007-08-15 22:25:16 EDT
Created attachment 161425 [details] patch that fixes open bug due to glibc update
Comment 2 Steve Dickson 2007-08-16 13:43:06 EDT
Fixed in nfs-utils-1.1.0-4.fc8
Comment 3 Todd Mokros 2007-08-17 10:12:44 EDT
Confirmed that nfs-utils-1.1.0-4.fc8 fixes the issue.
Comment 4 Bug Zapper 2008-04-04 09:36:36 EDT
Based on the date this bug was created, it appears to have been reported during the development of Fedora 8. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are changing the version of this bug to '8'. If this bug still exists in rawhide, please change the version back to rawhide. (If you're unable to change the bug's version, add a comment to the bug and someone will change it for you.) Thanks for your help and we apologize for the interruption. The process we're following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again.
Comment 5 Bug Zapper 2008-11-26 02:41:15 EST
This message is a reminder that Fedora 8 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 8. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '8'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 8's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 8 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Comment 6 Jon Stanley 2008-11-26 12:36:33 EST
As this bug is in MODIFIED, Fedora believes that a fix has been committed that resolves the problem listed in this bug report. If this is not the case, please re-open this report, noting the version of the package that you reproduced the bug against. Thanks for the report!