| Summary: | Inconsistency in error message while adding a duplicate netgroup. | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 | Reporter: | Gowrishankar Rajaiyan <grajaiya> |
| Component: | ipa | Assignee: | Rob Crittenden <rcritten> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | IDM QE LIST <seceng-idm-qe-list> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 6.2 | CC: | jgalipea, mkosek, spoore |
| Target Milestone: | rc | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | ipa-2.2.0-1.el6 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
| Doc Text: |
No documentation needed.
|
Story Points: | --- |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2012-06-20 13:16:08 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Bug Depends On: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 756082 | ||
|
Description
Gowrishankar Rajaiyan
2011-11-03 05:44:24 UTC
The issue here wasn't adding a conflicting name though. In this case the only problem is that there is a duplicate netgroup so I think the error is accurate. Otherwise you could be sent on a wild goose chase looking for a hostgroup named test2. I think the confusion is because I am repeating the same command in "Actual results". Let me put it this way: [root@decepticons ~]# ipa hostgroup-add test2 Description: test2 ----------------------- Added hostgroup "test2" ----------------------- Host-group: test2 Description: test2 [root@decepticons ~]# ipa netgroup-add test2 Description: test2 ipa: ERROR: netgroup with name "test2" already exists [root@decepticons ~]# so here I expected "ipa: ERROR: netgroup with name "test2" already exists. Hostgroups and netgroups share a common namespace." I think you have a point. We could find out if the colliding netgroup was created separately via netgroup-add or as a managed object of a hostgroup and display error message based on this information. We could check for objectclass: mepManagedEntry to distinguish these situations: 1) foo is a managed entry of a foo hostgroup # ipa netgroup-show --all --raw foo dn: cn=foo,cn=ng,cn=alt,dc=idm,dc=lab,dc=bos,dc=redhat,dc=com cn: foo description: ipaNetgroup foo nisdomainname: idm.lab.bos.redhat.com ipauniqueid: 69858e34-0917-11e1-8cce-00163e2d6a08 memberhost: cn=foo,cn=hostgroups,cn=accounts,dc=idm,dc=lab,dc=bos,dc=redhat,dc=com mepmanagedby: cn=foo,cn=hostgroups,cn=accounts,dc=idm,dc=lab,dc=bos,dc=redhat,dc=com objectclass: ipanisnetgroup objectclass: ipaobject objectclass: mepManagedEntry objectclass: ipaAssociation objectclass: top 2) Bar is a pure netgroup [root@vm-134 ~]# ipa netgroup-show --all --raw bar dn: ipauniqueid=717c04e2-0917-11e1-b2f0-00163e2d6a08,cn=ng,cn=alt,dc=idm,dc=lab,dc=bos,dc=redhat,dc=com cn: bar description: foo nisdomainname: idm.lab.bos.redhat.com ipauniqueid: 717c04e2-0917-11e1-b2f0-00163e2d6a08 objectclass: ipaobject objectclass: ipaassociation objectclass: ipanisnetgroup Upstream ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/2069 Fixed upstream: master: https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/changeset/2a667d94ec1ad8834f79e12b6e55745deca1cd4d ipa-2-2: https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/changeset/16d17f48dfc81f47d91696d8678699f88f10ae4c Verified. Version :: ipa-server-2.2.0-4.el6.x86_64 Automated Test Results :: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :: [ LOG ] :: netgroup_bz_750984: Inconsistency in error message while adding a duplicate netgroup :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :: [ PASS ] :: Running 'ipa hostgroup-add netgroup_bz_750984 --desc=netgroup_bz_750984' :: [ PASS ] :: Running 'ipa netgroup-add netgroup_bz_750984 --desc=netgroup_bz_750984 > /netgroup_bz_750984.28774.out 2>&1' :: [ PASS ] :: BZ 750984 not found. :: [ PASS ] :: Running 'ipa hostgroup-del netgroup_bz_750984' :: [ PASS ] :: Running 'ipa netgroup-add netgroup_bz_750984 --desc=netgroup_bz_750984' :: [ PASS ] :: Running 'ipa hostgroup-add netgroup_bz_750984 --desc=netgroup_bz_750984 > /netgroup_bz_750984.28774.out 2>&1' :: [ PASS ] :: BZ 750984 not found. :: [ PASS ] :: Running 'ipa netgroup-del netgroup_bz_750984' :: [ LOG ] :: Duration: 29s :: [ LOG ] :: Assertions: 8 good, 0 bad :: [ PASS ] :: RESULT: netgroup_bz_750984: Inconsistency in error message while adding a duplicate netgroup Manual Test Results :: [root@hp-xw6600-01 ipa-netgroup-cli]# ipa hostgroup-add netgroup_bz_750984 --desc=netgroup_bz_750984 ------------------------------------ Added hostgroup "netgroup_bz_750984" ------------------------------------ Host-group: netgroup_bz_750984 Description: netgroup_bz_750984 [root@hp-xw6600-01 ipa-netgroup-cli]# ipa netgroup-add netgroup_bz_750984 --desc=netgroup_bz_750984 ipa: ERROR: hostgroup with name "netgroup_bz_750984" already exists. Hostgroups and netgroups share a common namespace [root@hp-xw6600-01 ipa-netgroup-cli]# ipa netgroup-add netgroup_bz_750984 --desc=netgroup_bz_750984 ----------------------------------- Added netgroup "netgroup_bz_750984" ----------------------------------- Netgroup name: netgroup_bz_750984 Description: netgroup_bz_750984 NIS domain name: testrelm.com IPA unique ID: 5b37b7cc-6fb9-11e1-8903-0019bbea4c2b [root@hp-xw6600-01 ipa-netgroup-cli]# ipa hostgroup-add netgroup_bz_750984 --desc=netgroup_bz_750984 ipa: ERROR: netgroup with name "netgroup_bz_750984" already exists. Hostgroups and netgroups share a common namespace
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:
No documentation needed.
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-2012-0819.html |