Just an intuitive response, but I'd be looking at versions/presence/absence of packages related to python, xml, unicode, and perhaps locale. Comparing working and non-working systems.
On 2014-09-17 14:22, Ryan Clough wrote: > I have also confirmed that all 7 systems that do not complete remote commands > have the "rn" line separator. And I have done a random sampling of some of > the working systems and the line separator is only "n". > > Ryan Clough > Information Systems > Decision Sciences International Corporation [2] > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Michael Mraka <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Ryan Clough wrote: >> % All, >> % >> % I have 7 systems which will not complete a remote command no matter how >> % simple. I believe that the problem lies in the construction of the XML. >> % Here is how I found the difference in the systems output. >> % >> % 1. In order to remove osad from the picture, I stopped the daemon on a >> % system that does not complete the remote command and one that does. >> % >> % 2. Using SSM I send the same remote command to both systems, "ls /". A >> % simple "ls" on the root mount. >> % >> % 3. Now call "rhn_check -v -v -v -v -v -v -v" on both systems and capture >> % the output. >> % >> % 4. Compare output. >> % >> % Now the interesting lines are the XML lines and the "do_call" line. The >> % "do_call" line is much easier to see so I will show it here. >> % >> % Working system "do_call" line: >> % D: do_call script.run(4107, {'username': 'root', 'groupname': 'root', >> % 'now': '2014-09-16 23:18:23', 'timeout': 600, 'script': '#!/bin/shn# Add >> % your shell script belownls /'}){'cache_only': None} >> % >> % Nonworking system "do_call" line: >> % D: do_call script.run(4106, {'username': 'root', 'groupname': 'root', >> % 'now': '2014-09-16 23:15:44', 'timeout': 600, 'script': '#!/bin/shrn# Add >> % your shell script belowrnls /'}){'cache_only': None} >> % >> % As you will notice the line separators are different and it is my opinion >> % that the "r" has something to do with this failure. Any ideas about how to >> % find and fix this issue would be much appreciated. Let me know if you would >> % like additional information about my setup. >> % >> % Here is some additional information about the two systems: >> % >> % # cat /etc/issue >> % Scientific Linux release 6.5 (Carbon) >> % # python --version >> % Python 2.6.6 >> >> Is there difference betveen rhn-check version on those systems? >> >> Regards, >> >> -- >> Michael Mráka >> Satellite Engineering, Red Hat >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Spacewalk-list mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list [1] > > This communication is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is addressed > and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any review, > re-transmission, dissemination, copying or other use of, or taking of any > action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than > the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you received this communication > in error, please report the error to the sender by return email and delete > this communication from your records. > > _______________________________________________ > Spacewalk-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list [1] Links: ------ [1] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list [2] http://www.decisionsciencescorp.com/
_______________________________________________ Spacewalk-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list
