Uploaded image for project: 'Lustre'
  1. Lustre
  2. LU-5576

sanity test_103a: Error: 'permissions failed'

Details

    • Bug
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Minor
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • 3
    • 15556

    Description

      This issue was created by maloo for Dmitry Eremin <dmitry.eremin@intel.com>

      This issue relates to the following test suite run:
      https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/59668df2-32bb-11e4-9c61-5254006e85c2
      https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/0fc93e90-32e5-11e4-8c3a-5254006e85c2

      performing permissions...
      [12] $ id -u -- ok
      [19] $ mkdir d -- ok
      [20] $ cd d -- ok
      [21] $ umask 027 -- ok
      [22] $ touch f -- ok
      [23] $ ls -l f | awk -- '{ print $1, $3, $4 }' -- ok
      [30] $ echo root > f -- ok
      [32] $ su daemon -- ok
      [33] $ echo daemon >> f -- ok
      [36] $ su -- ok
      [42] $ chown bin:bin f -- ok
      [43] $ ls -l f | awk -- '{ print $1, $3, $4 }' -- ok
      [45] $ su bin -- ok
      [46] $ echo bin >> f -- ok
      [52] $ su daemon -- ok
      [53] $ cat f -- failed
      root                                  ? cat: f: Permission denied              
      bin                                   ? ~                                      
      [57] $ echo daemon >> f -- ok
      

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          Activity

            [LU-5576] sanity test_103a: Error: 'permissions failed'

            the el7 specific mod referred to is LU-5641. It is about a different failure, not the failure in 'touch e/i'

            bogl Bob Glossman (Inactive) added a comment - the el7 specific mod referred to is LU-5641 . It is about a different failure, not the failure in 'touch e/i'
            ys Yang Sheng added a comment -

            Hi, Yujian,

            Looks like not same issue. You encountered one obviously cause by environment. we need porting other patch.

            ys Yang Sheng added a comment - Hi, Yujian, Looks like not same issue. You encountered one obviously cause by environment. we need porting other patch.

            will create a separate ticket for the el7 specific problem I mentioned above

            bogl Bob Glossman (Inactive) added a comment - will create a separate ticket for the el7 specific problem I mentioned above

            Test 103a fails when the client node is running el7 for a different reason. some of the permissions subtests of 103a assume the user 'daemon' is a member of the group 'bin'. In a default install of el7 this isn't true. If I manually add 'daemon' as a member of the group 'bin' by editing the /etc/group file on the client node(s) for the test then test 103a passes 100%.

            I think it may be a TEI issue to ensure that the expected, assumed user/group setup is done on el7 test installs.

            bogl Bob Glossman (Inactive) added a comment - Test 103a fails when the client node is running el7 for a different reason. some of the permissions subtests of 103a assume the user 'daemon' is a member of the group 'bin'. In a default install of el7 this isn't true. If I manually add 'daemon' as a member of the group 'bin' by editing the /etc/group file on the client node(s) for the test then test 103a passes 100%. I think it may be a TEI issue to ensure that the expected, assumed user/group setup is done on el7 test installs.

            This was because of absence the l_getidentity utility on client side.

            dmiter Dmitry Eremin (Inactive) added a comment - This was because of absence the l_getidentity utility on client side.

            People

              dmiter Dmitry Eremin (Inactive)
              maloo Maloo
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              5 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: