+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #448036 +++ +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #445880 +++ Description of problem: When autofs parses /etc/nsswitch.conf, the lexer only recognizes as sources values which are given in an enumerated list. This is wrong because the nsswitch interface is designed to allow for arbitrarily-named modules to be used. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 5.0.3-11 How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install nss_db, and add "db" to the list of sources for any item in /etc/nsswitch.conf, so that nss_db will be used. 2. Restart autofs. Actual results: syntax error in nsswitch config near [ no opening bracket ] Expected results: No error, autofs starts up. -- Additional comment from jmoyer on 2008-05-09 12:51 EST -- Ian, this has now come up for the second time. Can we simply ignore sources we don't support? -- Additional comment from nalin on 2008-05-09 13:23 EST -- FWIW, that's the behavior I'd prefer. BTW, I was wrong about the how-to-reproduce it part: apparently only the "automount:" setting matters. -- Additional comment from ikent on 2008-05-09 21:05 EST -- (In reply to comment #1) > Ian, this has now come up for the second time. Can we simply ignore sources we > don't support? Yes, I'm going to have to work a bit harder on this. The problem being that our yacc parser is written to recognize a list of known sources. I haven't looked yet but I didn't generalize it last time so there's probably a reason for that. -- Additional comment from ikent on 2008-05-09 21:06 EST -- (In reply to comment #2) > FWIW, that's the behavior I'd prefer. BTW, I was wrong about the > how-to-reproduce it part: apparently only the "automount:" setting matters. Understood. Yes, the "automount:" entry is the only bit autofs looks at. -- Additional comment from ikent on 2008-05-12 02:15 EST -- Created an attachment (id=305082) Patch to ignore nsswitch sources that aren't supported -- Additional comment from ikent on 2008-05-12 03:06 EST -- Could you please check this to see if the patch functions correctly. The built packages are available at: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/packages/autofs/5.0.3/14. -- Additional comment from fedora-triage-list on 2008-05-14 06:55 EST -- Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping -- Additional comment from nalin on 2008-05-14 11:54 EST -- Yes, 5.0.3-14 seems to work correctly. Thanks! -- Additional comment from jmoyer on 2008-05-14 14:38 EST -- sounds like a regression test is in order. -- Additional comment from ikent on 2008-05-22 22:58 EST -- (In reply to comment #8) > Yes, 5.0.3-14 seems to work correctly. Thanks! Oh boy, I missed this. Thanks nalin, I'll merge this upstream and push it out to F-9. -- Additional comment from ikent on 2008-05-22 22:59 EST -- (In reply to comment #9) > sounds like a regression test is in order. Yep, and a RHEL bug to go with it. Ian --- Additional comment from pm-rhel on 2008-06-02 15:57:27 EDT --- 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.
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.
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 therefore 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-2009-1010.html