Just for the sake of testing, I also installed 1.8.0pre4 RPMs on a RHEL 7.5 beta system and still had the same issue when using ls with directories under /afs/...
Also (maybe this was already mentioned), it seems to be only directories as well. I can do an ls of a known file in my AFS home directory just fine: [mvanderw@<host> ~]$ echo testing > /afs/crc.nd.edu/user/m/mvanderw/testing [mvanderw@<host> ~]$ cat /afs/crc.nd.edu/user/m/mvanderw/testing testing [mvanderw@<host> ~]$ ls -al /afs/crc.nd.edu/user/m/mvanderw/testing -rw-r--r-- 1 mvanderw campus 8 Feb 2 11:20 /afs/ crc.nd.edu/user/m/mvanderw/testing vs [mvanderw@<host> ~]$ ls -al /afs/crc.nd.edu/user/m/mvanderw ls: reading directory /afs/crc.nd.edu/user/m/mvanderw: Not a directory total 0 Any ideas? Or anything we can test/do that would help? Thanks! -- Matt Vander Werf HPC System Administrator University of Notre Dame Center for Research Computing - Union Station 506 W. South Street South Bend, IN 46601 Phone: (574) 631-0692 On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:05 AM, Stephan Wiesand <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 2. Feb 2018, at 09:55, Stephan Wiesand <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > >> On 2. Feb 2018, at 02:14, Benjamin Kaduk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 05:11:24PM +0100, Stephan Wiesand wrote: > >>> Comparing the 1.6.22.2 module builds from the SL packaging, where the > kABI hashes of the used symbols are stored as a requirement, is seems none > of those hashes changed between -693 and -830. > >>> > >>> There are two differences in the configure results: > >>> > >>> -ac_cv_linux_header_sched_signal_h=no > >>> +ac_cv_linux_header_sched_signal_h=yes > >>> > >>> -ac_cv_linux_struct_file_operations_has_iterate=no > >>> +ac_cv_linux_struct_file_operations_has_iterate=yes > >> > >> That's very helpful to know. > >> > >> Does the new tree actually have a sched/signal.h header? > > > > Yes it does. The only content is a guarded include of <linux/sched.h> > > > >> Does the new struct file_operations have an 'iterate' member > >> function? > > > > Yes it does, wrapped in a RH_KABI_ITERATE macro. > > er, nonsense, that's RH_KABI_EXTEND, sorry > > > > >> (The idea being to tell whether they changed something in new and > >> interesting ways or our configure test(s) are broken.) > > > > It's the former :-( > > _______________________________________________ > OpenAFS-info mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info >
