Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 18886

Summary:	rexec(3) bug in inet/rexec.c
Product:	[Retired] Red Hat Linux	Reporter:	Nalin Dahyabhai <nalin>
Component:	glibc	Assignee:	Jakub Jelinek <jakub>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Aaron Brown <abrown>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	7.0	CC:	fweimer
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2000-11-20 23:35:38 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Nalin Dahyabhai 2000-10-11 13:42:40 UTC

The rexec() function in rexec.c is supposed to receive the second argument
(rport) in network-byte order, but it doesn't swap it back to host order
before passing it to snprintf() for formatting the strings.

Comment 1 Jakub Jelinek 2000-10-13 06:08:35 UTC

Do you have some testcase, like e.g. rsh does not work or something like that?
I've submitted a patch to fix this to Ulrich, but would like to verify it.

Comment 2 Nalin Dahyabhai 2000-10-19 14:14:55 UTC

*** Bug 19379 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 3 Nalin Dahyabhai 2000-10-19 14:15:47 UTC

Sorry for the delay.  The test case is to run rexec to any host from a
little-endian machine.  If you strace it, it'll try to connect to port 2 instead
of 512.

Comment 4 Jakub Jelinek 2000-10-19 14:50:59 UTC

Please check glibc-2.1.95-1, it should be fixed there.

Comment 5 Jakub Jelinek 2000-10-20 21:32:42 UTC

*** Bug 19379 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 6 Nalin Dahyabhai 2000-10-24 18:56:02 UTC

*** Bug 19602 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 7 Jakub Jelinek 2000-10-27 16:08:15 UTC

*** Bug 19873 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 8 Nalin Dahyabhai 2000-11-20 23:34:47 UTC

Jakub, this is fixed in the latest errata candidate.

Comment 9 Nalin Dahyabhai 2000-11-20 23:35:36 UTC

*** Bug 20441 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 10 Nalin Dahyabhai 2001-02-05 06:47:54 UTC

*** Bug 25363 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***