Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.

Bug 634939

Summary: rpmlint errors and warnings
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Reporter: Alexander Todorov <atodorov>
Component: libcgroupAssignee: Ivana Varekova <varekova>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Red Hat Kernel QE team <kernel-qe>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 6.0CC: jsafrane, rvokal
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 663082 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-05-19 13:13:14 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:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 672300    

Description Alexander Todorov 2010-09-17 12:01:20 UTC 
Description of problem:
rpmlint shows errors and warnings

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
libcgroup-0.36.1-6.el6.x86_64.rpm

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. run rpmlint -i *.rpm
2.
3.
  
Actual results (as shown by rpmlint):
libcgroup.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.36-6 ['0.36.1-6.el6', '0.36.1-6']
The last entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not
coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package.

libcgroup.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /lib64/libcgroup.so.1.0.36 exit.5
This library package calls exit() or _exit(), probably in a non-fork()
context. Doing so from a library is strongly discouraged - when a library
function calls exit(), it prevents the calling program from handling the
error, reporting it to the user, closing files properly, and cleaning up any
state that the program has. It is preferred for the library to return an
actual error code and let the calling program decide how to handle the
situation.

libcgroup.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /bin/cgexec root 04755L
The file is setuid, this may be dangerous, especially if this file is setuid
root.

libcgroup.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /bin/cgexec 04755L
A standard executable should have permission set to 0755. If you get this
message, it means that you have a wrong executable permissions in some files
included in your package.

libcgroup.x86_64: E: unknown-key (MD5
The package was signed, but with an unknown key. See the rpm --import option
for more information.

libcgroup.x86_64: W: missing-lsb-keyword Default-Stop in /etc/rc.d/init.d/cgred
The package contains an init script that does not contain one of the LSB init
script comment block convention keywords that are recommendable for all init
scripts.  If there is nothing to add to a keyword's value, include the keyword
in the script with an empty value.  Note that as of version 3.2, the LSB
specification does not mandate presence of any keywords.

libcgroup.x86_64: W: missing-lsb-keyword Default-Stop in /etc/rc.d/init.d/cgconfig
The package contains an init script that does not contain one of the LSB init
script comment block convention keywords that are recommendable for all init
scripts.  If there is nothing to add to a keyword's value, include the keyword
in the script with an empty value.  Note that as of version 3.2, the LSB
specification does not mandate presence of any keywords.

1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 4 warnings.
Comment 1 Jan Safranek 2010-12-14 15:04:12 UTC 
(In reply to comment #0)
> libcgroup.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.36-6 ['0.36.1-6.el6',
> '0.36.1-6']

Fixed

> libcgroup.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /lib64/libcgroup.so.1.0.36
> exit.5

There is nothing I can do about it, the library calls exit in fatal failure of config parser (which is generated by flex/byacc).

> libcgroup.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /bin/cgexec root 04755L
> libcgroup.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /bin/cgexec 04755L

The new 0.37 version heading to RHEL6 shows similar warnings + errors, it's for security reasons.

/bin/cgexec is now SGID binary with new group 'cgred', because we need cgexec to be able to write to /var/run/cgred.socket and communicate with running cgred daemon.

> libcgroup.x86_64: W: missing-lsb-keyword Default-Stop in
> /etc/rc.d/init.d/cgred
> libcgroup.x86_64: W: missing-lsb-keyword Default-Stop in
> /etc/rc.d/init.d/cgconfig

Looking at the current packaging guidelines, "If the service does not start by default in any runlevel, this line should be omitted." And the services *are* off by default.
Comment 2 Jan Safranek 2010-12-14 15:08:54 UTC 
And for the record, here is list of current rpmlint complaints, all of them explained above:
libcgroup.i686: W: non-standard-gid /bin/cgexec cgred
libcgroup.i686: E: setgid-binary /bin/cgexec cgred 02755L
libcgroup.i686: E: non-standard-executable-perm /bin/cgexec 02755L
libcgroup.i686: W: missing-lsb-keyword Default-Stop in /etc/rc.d/init.d/cgred
libcgroup.i686: W: missing-lsb-keyword Default-Stop in /etc/rc.d/init.d/cgconfig
Comment 4 Mike Gahagan 2011-02-10 19:09:47 UTC 
[root@test1239 ~]# rpmlint libcgroup-0.37-1.el6.i686.rpm 
libcgroup.i686: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
libcgroup.i686: W: non-standard-gid /bin/cgexec cgred
libcgroup.i686: E: setgid-binary /bin/cgexec cgred 02755L
libcgroup.i686: E: non-standard-executable-perm /bin/cgexec 02755L
libcgroup.i686: W: missing-lsb-keyword Default-Stop in /etc/rc.d/init.d/cgred
libcgroup.i686: W: missing-lsb-keyword Default-Stop in /etc/rc.d/init.d/cgconfig
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings.
[root@test1239 ~]# rpmlint libcgroup-0.37-1.el6.x86_64.rpm 
libcgroup.x86_64: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
libcgroup.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /bin/cgexec cgred
libcgroup.x86_64: E: setgid-binary /bin/cgexec cgred 02755L
libcgroup.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /bin/cgexec 02755L
libcgroup.x86_64: W: missing-lsb-keyword Default-Stop in /etc/rc.d/init.d/cgred
libcgroup.x86_64: W: missing-lsb-keyword Default-Stop in /etc/rc.d/init.d/cgconfig
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings.

I think these are all expected and everything to do with rpm packages being signed is handled by the errata tool later in the process so this can be verified.
Comment 5 errata-xmlrpc 2011-05-19 13:13:14 UTC 
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-2011-0577.html