Bug 693475 - fuser does not correctly identify IPv6 sockets
Summary: fuser does not correctly identify IPv6 sockets
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 693476
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5
Classification: Red Hat
Component: psmisc
Version: 5.6
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Linux
unspecified
low
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Jan Görig
QA Contact: BaseOS QE - Apps
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-04-04 19:07 UTC by Joel Davis
Modified: 2011-04-04 19:57 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-04-04 19:57:01 UTC
Target Upstream Version:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Joel Davis 2011-04-04 19:07:57 UTC
Description of problem:
In RHEL 5.5 fuser recognizes IPv6 sockets as IPv4 meaning that "fuser -d tcp <portNum>" returns expected output but "fuser -6 -d tcp <portNum>" does not. Running "fuser -4 -d tcp <portNum>" returns the PID associated with the port. In RHEL 5.6 neither -4 or -6 options return the PID. Users can work around the issue by grepping the output of an "lsof -Pi" command.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
psmisc-22.2

How reproducible: Through the following steps:

Steps to Reproduce (on RHEL 5.6):
1. bind to an available tcp port using IPv6 (attached the python script I was using to reproduce.)
2. run "fuser -d tcp <portNum>" ("fuser -d tcp 8080" with the attached script)
  
Actual results:
User is returned to prompt with no output to the console.

Expected results:
Output similar to: 8080/tcp: 20867

Additional info:
netstat and lsof both show the port as being IPv6
Appears to be reproducible on 32bit and 64bit
Also reproducible on RHEL6's psmisc-22.3

It appears that the problem was identified upstream and already fixed in the psmisc-22.11 release:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=581604

Also, newer fedora's seem to be using psmisc-22.13

Comment 1 Joel Davis 2011-04-04 19:57:01 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 693476 ***


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.