Description of problem: The rpcgssd, rpcidmapd and rpcsvcgssd init scripts returns incorrect error codes. Some constructions in these scripts also prevent the correct status command call, for example: if [ ! -f /etc/sysconfig/network ]; then exit 0 fi [ "${NETWORKING}" = "no" ] && exit 0 [ ! -x /usr/sbin/rpc.gssd ] && exit 0 [ "${SECURE_NFS}" != "yes" ] && exit 0 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): all How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: When fixing this bug, please obbey our init script guidelines and be sure that status command is run correctly. Our guidelines are on following two pages: http://intranet.corp.redhat.com/ic/intranet/InitscriptsSpec.html http://intranet.corp.redhat.com/ic/intranet/InitscriptGuidelines.html For an example of the script that returns the error codes correctly and always runs status see: http://devserv.devel.redhat.com/~mmarcini/amd This bug is tracked by 237789.
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has requested further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update release.
fixed in nfs-utils-1.0.9-22.el5
Created attachment 183361 [details] rpcgssd.diff
Created attachment 183381 [details] rpcidmapd.diff
Created attachment 183401 [details] rpcsvcgssd.diff
I guess I don't understand why moving all the global sanity checking into the start method is a good thing. What breaks by having these checks at the beginning of the script?
The status command won't be able to run and also the service won't be able to stop when some of the checks fail.
Should the return value of a service that's not configured be the "program is not configured" value (i.e. 6)? Regardless of that command argument was given? Also before a server is disabled shouldn't the server be stopped? Now I'm more than willing to make the appropriate changes (believe me I don't want to be a pain) but I just when through this very exercise with the Fedora crowd so I'm concern about make changes here that will not be acceptable there...
There is nice page from Harald Hoyer who is working on new init for fedora. The recommendations for fedora and RHEL are IMHO consistent, so if you fix the bug following this page: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/SysVInitScript everything should be OK. (of course RHEL 5 init does not need LSB header and some othre stuff).
This request was previously evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release, but Red Hat was unable to resolve it in time. This request will be reviewed for a future Red Hat Enterprise Linux release.
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on the solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2007-0651.html