Am I reading the version number wrong or is there a different numbering
scheme inside of RHEL then in Fedora?
http://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/releases/11/Everything/i386/os/Packages
/autofs-5.0.4-24.i586.rpm
I will work on submitting a bug.
All I meant by issues is that I would rather deal with losing my
official Redhat Support by using a Redhat unapproved, yet more stable,
version of autofs then continue to use the Redhat approved autofs
package and have automount issues. Hopefully that makes sense.
Jason Breitman
[email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Kent [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 8:56 PM
To: Breitman, Jason
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [autofs] automount restart required
Breitman, Jason wrote:
> Operating System: RHEL 5.3 (32 bit)
>
> kernel package: kernel-2.6.18-128.el5
>
> autofs package: autofs-5.0.1-0.rc2.131.el5_4.1
>
> nfs-utils package: nfs-utils-1.0.9-40.el5
>
> Map Type: Direct Map stored in NIS
>
> Issue:
> Users and applications will not be able to get into one of the
> directories in the direct map.
> The system reports no such file or directory.
> I can get to the mount point, but not any further.
>
> * I can not reproduce the issue on demand.
> ** The issue does happen on multiple hosts with the same build.
>
> Resolution:
> /etc/init.d/autofs restart
>
> Question:
> I noticed much later versions of autofs on Fedora. (autofs-5.0.4-XXX)
> I also read the changelog and there are many fixes that might be
> considered a solution to my problem.
I doubt it.
The RHEL version you have is actually quite close to the Fedora version.
> Bottom line is what is the most stable package of autofs that I should
> be using on my RHEL 5.3 Systems.
The version you have is the latest RHEL version.
I'm not aware of the problem you describe so log a bug and include your
maps, a debug log showing the problem and any other information like how
often it happens.
> I understand that RHEL support may be affected, but would be willing
to
> deal with those issues.
So now there is more than one issue, what are the other issues?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jason Breitman
> [email protected]
>
> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS MESSAGE AND ANY ATTACHMENT MAY BE
PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL, PROPRIETARY OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED FROM
DISCLOSURE. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or
use of this message and any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by
replying to the message and permanently delete it from your computer and
destroy any printout thereof.
>
> _______________________________________________
> autofs mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS MESSAGE AND ANY ATTACHMENT MAY BE PRIVILEGED,
CONFIDENTIAL, PROPRIETARY OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED FROM DISCLOSURE. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, copying or use of this message and any attachment
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
notify us immediately by replying to the message and permanently delete it from
your computer and destroy any printout thereof.
_______________________________________________
autofs mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
