Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||stropts.h file not present in /usr/include|
|Product:||Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6||Reporter:||Nawaz <nawaz_patel>|
|Component:||man-pages-overrides||Assignee:||Peter Schiffer <pschiffe>|
|Status:||CLOSED ERRATA||QA Contact:||BaseOS QE - Apps <qe-baseos-apps>|
|Version:||6.0||CC:||ddumas, ebachalo, hannsj_uhl, riek, syeghiay|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
Prior to this update, a manual page for the fattach function was missing. This update adds the fattach(2) manual page.
|:||714073 (view as bug list)||Environment:|
|Last Closed:||2011-12-06 06:45:56 EST||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:|
|Bug Blocks:||714073, 743047, 748554|
Description Nawaz 2010-11-23 05:30:31 EST
Description of problem: stropts.h file not present in /usr/include Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): RHEL 6.0 GA How reproducible: Fresh install of RHEL6.0 on any x86_64 machine Steps to Reproduce: 1. Search for file in /usr/include 2. 3. Actual results: File not found Expected results: File should be present. Additional info:
Comment 2 Daniel Riek 2010-11-28 20:08:41 EST
This is an omission by purpose. Citing from comment 1 in bug 439403: > That's on purpose. Linux doesn't support STREAMS (many years ago it was > available as a third party module, but it hasn't worked for years). > stropts.h is part of a POSIX XSR option, which Linux now, matching reality, > says it is not supported. > > No idea why graphviz needs it (when all the syscalls are stubbed), but it needs > fixing (either by adding configure checks, or by using the POSIX recommended > check - #include <unistd.h>, > #if defined _XOPEN_STREAMS && _XOPEN_STREAMS == -1 > /* XSR option is not available, headers, data types etc. may not be > available. */ > #endif > see http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/unistd.h.html > for more details).
Comment 3 Daniel Riek 2010-11-28 20:09:04 EST
NOTE: Bugzilla is not a support tool The Bugzilla interface at bugzilla.redhat.com is used internally by Red Hat to process changes e.g. to Red Hat Enterprise Linux and related products, as well as by the Fedora Community to develop the Fedora Project. It is publicly available and everyone with an email address is able to create an account, file bugs, comment on bugs she or he has access to. Not all bugs are public though and not all issues filed are handled in the same way: it makes a huge difference who is behind a bug. Red Hat does monitor Bugzilla entries, and it does review them for inclusion in errata, etc. Nevertheless, as noted on the login page, Bugzilla is not a Support tool. It is an Engineering tool. It is used by Red Hat Engineering to track issues and product changes, as well as to interact with Egineering partners and other parties external to Red Hat on a technical level. So while all changes to Red Hat Enterprise Linux will at a point go through Bugzilla, this difference has a number of important consequences for general product issues filed directly through Bugzilla by external users without any privileged Engineering relationship: * Red Hat does NOT guarantee any response time or Service Level Agreement (SLA) for Bugzilla entries. - A review might happen immediately or after a time span of any length. The SLAs for Red Hat Enterprise Linux provided by Red Hat Support can be found at: https://www.redhat.com/support/policy/sla/production/ * Not all comments are publicly visible. - Red Hat Support provides customers with appropriate information excerpts and status updates from that. Red Hat does not commit to provide detailed explanations, or guidance in the context of Bugzilla. Therefore for example, Bugzilla entries might be closed as it seems without any further explanation, while Red Hat Support actually provides such explanation to customers filing through the regular support channels. * Issues coming through the regular support process, will always be prioritized higher than issues of similar impact and severity that are being filed directly through Bugzilla (unless the later get linked to customer support tickets). This means that they are more likely to be addressed and they are more likely to meet inclusion criteria consistent with the Red Hat Enterprise Linux life cycle policy: http://www.redhat.com/security/updates/errata/ * Work-arounds and Hotfixes if possible and appropriate are provided by Red Hat Support and through the regular support process. - This means that even before a permanent fix is made available through RHN, customers who raised a high severity issue through Red Hat Support, are likely to receive an interim solution. Red Hat provides common Bugzilla access in order provide efficient development community interaction and as much transparency as possible to our customers. Our Engineers are encouraged to provide non-customer specific and non-confidential information publicly as often as possible. So while Red Hat considers issues directly entered into Bugzilla valuable feedback - may it be as comments to existing Bugzilla entries or by opening a new one; for customers encountering production issues, Bugzilla is not the right channel. Therefore we ask our customers to file requests important for their production systems via our Support service. Only for those issues, we can ensure a consistent communication. Information about our production support process can be found at: http://www.redhat.com/support/process/ Bugzilla can always be used as a supportive channel to that communication. Note: If your customer is participating in the Academic program and has chosen to run a Subscription without support, they consequently have no access to Red Hat Support and thus no SLA. If you feel that this is insufficient for your use case, you should consider contacting the Red Hat Education specialist as described at: http://www.redhat.com/solutions/education/academic/individual/
Comment 7 Eric Bachalo 2011-05-16 20:02:48 EDT
Changing component to man-pages: I sugguest The following man-pages should be updated: fattach(3P), fdetach(3P), getmsg(3P), getpmsg(3P), ioctl(3P), isastream(3P), putmsg(3), putpmsg(3P), stropts.h(0P) to link to an UNIMPLEMENTED man page similar to getmsg(2P) i.e. man -s2 getmsg.
Comment 8 Ivana Varekova 2011-06-17 06:14:27 EDT
The manual pages mentioned in comment 7 are in posix part which is the description of posix norm. All of them include a head which tells this is norm description and the the functions could not be implemented on the each version of linux. All of them except of fattach have a version in section 2 which link to unimplemented.2 manual page. Thus the only think which can be done from man-pages side is to add fattach.2 as a link to unimplemented.2.
Comment 13 Eliska Slobodova 2011-09-29 07:14:44 EDT
Technical note added. If any revisions are required, please edit the "Technical Notes" field accordingly. All revisions will be proofread by the Engineering Content Services team. New Contents: Prior to this update, a manual page for the fattach function was missing. This update adds the fattach(2) manual page.
Comment 14 errata-xmlrpc 2011-12-06 06:45:56 EST
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-1571.html