Note: This is a beta release of Red Hat Bugzilla 5.0. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Also email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback here.
Bug 146746 - Minor fix required for netfs init script
Summary: Minor fix required for netfs init script
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED INSUFFICIENT_DATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: initscripts
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Bill Nottingham
QA Contact: Brock Organ
URL:
Whiteboard: bzcl34nup
Depends On:
Blocks: FC5Target
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2005-02-01 06:16 UTC by Reuben Farrelly
Modified: 2014-03-17 02:52 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-05-07 00:06:09 UTC


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Reuben Farrelly 2005-02-01 06:16:10 UTC
Seems that the netfs init script does not return [  OK  ] if it is "stopped" if
no filesystem are required to be unmounted, however it does return [  OK  ] if
it is "started" with no valid file systems.

eg

[root@tornado init.d]# /etc/init.d/netfs start
Mounting other filesystems:  [  OK  ]
[root@tornado init.d]# /etc/init.d/netfs stop 
[root@tornado init.d]# 

This is with initscripts-8.04-1.
Granted, is a minor bug but hopefully would also be very simple to fix.

Comment 1 Bill Nottingham 2005-02-01 06:44:25 UTC
Actually, it should just not do anything in the first  case.

Comment 2 Reuben Farrelly 2005-02-01 06:57:15 UTC
For the record of this report and future reference - what are the 'rules' as to
whether a script should return a status of OK - is it ever acceptable for a
script to simply return nothing regardless of success and/or failure?

Comment 3 Bill Nottingham 2005-02-01 17:38:23 UTC
I should double check what LSB says, but in the case where it has absolutely
nothing to do, I don't see a problem with silently exiting.

Comment 4 Bug Zapper 2008-04-03 15:51:22 UTC
Based on the date this bug was created, it appears to have been reported
against rawhide during the development of a Fedora release that is no
longer maintained. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are
flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer
maintained. If this bug remains in NEEDINFO thirty (30) days from now,
we will automatically close it.

If you can reproduce this bug in a maintained Fedora version (7, 8, or
rawhide), please change this bug to the respective version and change
the status to ASSIGNED. (If you're unable to change the bug's version
or status, add a comment to the bug and someone will change it for you.)

Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled
these issues to this point.

The process we're following is outlined here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp

We will be following the process here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this
doesn't happen again.

Comment 5 Bug Zapper 2008-05-07 00:06:07 UTC
This bug has been in NEEDINFO for more than 30 days since feedback was
first requested. As a result we are closing it.

If you can reproduce this bug in the future against a maintained Fedora
version please feel free to reopen it against that version.

The process we're following is outlined here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp


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