Reproducer: auto.master contains: /data /etc/auto.data /etc/auto.data contains: +/etc/maps/auto.data +auto.data Included map /etc/maps/auto.data contains: datamount_local -rw,soft,intr 10.33.1.41:/exports/datamount_local Included nis map auto.data contains: # ypcat auto.data -rw,soft,intr 10.33.1.41:/exports/datamount_nis autofs will correctly mount /data/datamount_local which it picks from the map /etc/maps/auto.data. However it will not mount /data/datamount_nis listed in the nis maps. # cd /data/datamount_local # cd /data/datamount_nis -bash: cd: /data/datamount_nis: No such file or directory /data/datamount_nis will mount correctly from the nis map if the included /etc/maps/auto.data is commented out. If instead of the nis map, another file based map is included, the auto mounts work as expected. This is a regression since this functionality worked fine on autofs-5.0.1-0.rc2.102.x86_64.rpm The following versions display this problem autofs-5.0.1-0.rc2.131.el5 autofs-5.0.1-0.rc2.143.el5
Using the information in comment #0 this issue was easily duplicated. I believe it is due to changes made to fix the negative caching of non-existent map keys.
Created attachment 415043 [details] Patch - fix negative cache included map lookup
A test build which includes the above patch has been done. It is located at: http://people.redhat.com/~ikent/autofs-5.0.1-0.rc2.143.bz593378.1.el5 Please test this package and report results.
I can't identify any side effects from this change. I've run our regression tests against the change for i386 and x86_64 only without any unexplained fails. I've also added a test based on the reproducer in comment #0. So the bug has been placed in MODIFIED state.
Reproduced in autofs-5.0.1-0.rc2.131.el5 and verified in autofs-5.0.1-0.rc2.144.el5.
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-2011-1079.html