From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 21 11:51:30 2012 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Nov 2012 16:51:30 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59370 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TbDWJ-0006IA-LS for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:51:29 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53801) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TbCsc-0005NU-TG for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:10:29 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TbCrL-00043Z-8A for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:09:11 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]:46828) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TbCrL-00043O-4n for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:09:07 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:57471) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TbCrB-00088o-Ng for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:09:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TbCr0-00041D-Vt for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:08:57 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4036) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TbCr0-000417-Ny for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:08:46 -0500 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qALG8jbE026863 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:08:45 -0500 Received: from ybronhei.tlv.redhat.com (mars-vdsg.tlv.redhat.com [10.35.1.138] (may be forged)) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qALG8hCA030253; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:08:44 -0500 Message-ID: <50ACFC3A.5040705@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:07:22 +0200 From: ybronhei User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121029 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Subject: Differences between 'su' version give different results Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.23 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 208.118.235.17 X-Spam-Score: -4.2 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:51:26 -0500 Cc: Dan Kenigsberg X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -4.2 (----) Differences between 'su' version give different results in the following shell script: # !/bin/sh func() { su user > /dev/null 2>&1 << EOF echo >> /tmp/b EOF } if func; then echo "access" else echo "no access" fi over fedora 17 I run - coreutils 8.15-8: if the file is not accessible by user the script prints no access, and the other way around. over rhel 6.3 we run - coreutils 8.4: the result of func is always "access" without any dependency of the file permissions.. My first guess was that it returns 0 because the 'su' command was succeeded, but with strace you see that the script runs differently. Is it a bug? Thanks. -- Yaniv Bronhaim. RedHat, Israel 09-7692289 054-7744187 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 21 12:07:34 2012 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Nov 2012 17:07:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59404 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TbDlu-0006fz-C8 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 12:07:34 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1130) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TbDlo-0006fi-Sd; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 12:07:31 -0500 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qALH6BDj023151 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 21 Nov 2012 12:06:12 -0500 Received: from [10.3.113.108] (ovpn-113-108.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.108]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qALH6Aug023153; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 12:06:11 -0500 Message-ID: <50AD0A01.5090004@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:06:09 -0700 From: Eric Blake Organization: Red Hat User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121029 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ybronhei Subject: Re: bug#12954: Differences between 'su' version give different results References: <50ACFC3A.5040705@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <50ACFC3A.5040705@redhat.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 OpenPGP: url=http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig6DE589426233E5CF8B55F6E4" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.24 X-Spam-Score: -4.5 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control Cc: 12954-done@debbugs.gnu.org, Dan Kenigsberg X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -4.5 (----) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig6DE589426233E5CF8B55F6E4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable tag 12954 notabug thanks On 11/21/2012 09:07 AM, ybronhei wrote: > Differences between 'su' version give different results in the followin= g > shell script: > over fedora 17 I run - coreutils 8.15-8: if the file is not accessible > by user the script prints no access, and the other way around. > over rhel 6.3 we run - coreutils 8.4: the result of func is always > "access" without any dependency of the file permissions.. My first gues= s > was that it returns 0 because the 'su' command was succeeded, but with > strace you see that the script runs differently. >=20 > Is it a bug? Thanks for the report. Perhaps it is a bug in the older coreutils 8.4 that was fixed for coreutils 8.15, although a quick read through NEWS didn't find such a mention (only that 8.9 was the point at which upstream quit building su by default, and therefore Fedora 17 is using a non-default build in order to get su from coreutils 8.15). Or it could be a patch that is applied to Fedora but not to RHEL. Either way, upstream coreutils no longer maintains coreutils (newer distros, such as Fedora 18, use 'su' from util-linux); furthermore, upstream, we only focus on fixing current bugs, and not on backporting fixes to older releases. So your question should be redirected downstream to your particular distro (that is, please file a support request with Red Hat), as it is not something we are worried about here. I'm closing this bug report because there is nothing further to do upstream; but obviously the issue is real for your setup, and you should feel free to send further replies if you have more questions and/or file a downstream bug and want to post the results of that downstream bug resolution back to this list. --=20 Eric Blake eblake@redhat.com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org --------------enig6DE589426233E5CF8B55F6E4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJQrQoCAAoJEKeha0olJ0Nqh5sH/2KUV73x+tBh9BLMpzkuQHrN NjrLG0+WK3gPQ3Nr5uke6t9MTviMrkYhvAWJEcvt/w/jTB/JzakkgAoiU4q5RuR3 0dDOEywhPV3ELe68sONI8rsf5+Jlr5fDvQ9DE1CBzc6Rh9ki8sxDznsL5wEWYrIL F8j/sb4RCgZXCIXkJkdAw8AtgqX0q2nOwdjNdRad51N1FqgezhKdKhOZJ2lEW2fZ Kkwa/xxw7nHQFFQHgH8fzQuBXF+KdlHVIMcr9PSXtnEccfYbCI77w7tpGJ5sBYV1 hxwxCO/q3hbfEB67w0+bgC/6YLBuQ8MGZuGd5J/w4gJLDs1kqc+jwy6Q0QFIeYA= =Oqr/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig6DE589426233E5CF8B55F6E4-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Nov 22 03:40:07 2012 Received: (at 12954) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Nov 2012 08:40:07 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60279 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TbSKN-0007qO-6o for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 03:40:07 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42465) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TbSKL-0007qF-E8 for 12954@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 03:40:06 -0500 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qAM8ciEH014860 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for <12954@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 03:38:44 -0500 Received: from ybronhei.tlv.redhat.com (mars-vdsg.tlv.redhat.com [10.35.1.138] (may be forged)) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qAM8chWl026112; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 03:38:44 -0500 Message-ID: <50ADE441.5050805@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 10:37:21 +0200 From: ybronhei User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121029 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: 12954@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Fix the 'su' bug for rhel6.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.22 X-Spam-Score: -4.5 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 12954 Cc: Dan Kenigsberg X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -4.5 (----) Hey, I would like to have a fix for that issue (as it was fixed in newer versions), I want to merge it to the current version of rhel6.3 (coreutils-8.4-19.el6.x86_64) Please update me. Thanks. -- Yaniv Bronhaim. RedHat, Israel 09-7692289 054-7744187 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Nov 22 04:52:28 2012 Received: (at 12954-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Nov 2012 09:52:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60353 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TbTSN-0001y9-VY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 04:52:28 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45339) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TbTSJ-0001xt-9d for 12954-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 04:52:26 -0500 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qAM9p2f9028937 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for <12954-done@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 04:51:02 -0500 Received: from [10.34.4.155] (unused-4-155.brq.redhat.com [10.34.4.155]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qAM9p0tN018664; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 04:51:01 -0500 Subject: Re: bug#12954: Differences between 'su' version give different results From: Ondrej Vasik To: ybronhei In-Reply-To: <50AD0A01.5090004@redhat.com> References: <50ACFC3A.5040705@redhat.com> <50AD0A01.5090004@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Organization: Red Hat, Inc. Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 10:51:23 +0100 Message-ID: <1353577883.31661.11.camel@dhcp-24-196.brq.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 10.5.11.12 X-Spam-Score: -4.5 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 12954-done Cc: 12954-done@debbugs.gnu.org, Eric Blake , Dan Kenigsberg X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list Reply-To: ovasik@redhat.com List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -4.5 (----) On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 10:06 -0700, Eric Blake wrote: > tag 12954 notabug > thanks > > On 11/21/2012 09:07 AM, ybronhei wrote: > > Differences between 'su' version give different results in the following > > shell script: > > > over fedora 17 I run - coreutils 8.15-8: if the file is not accessible > > by user the script prints no access, and the other way around. > > over rhel 6.3 we run - coreutils 8.4: the result of func is always > > "access" without any dependency of the file permissions.. My first guess > > was that it returns 0 because the 'su' command was succeeded, but with > > strace you see that the script runs differently. > > > > Is it a bug? > > Thanks for the report. Perhaps it is a bug in the older coreutils 8.4 > that was fixed for coreutils 8.15, although a quick read through NEWS > didn't find such a mention (only that 8.9 was the point at which > upstream quit building su by default, and therefore Fedora 17 is using a > non-default build in order to get su from coreutils 8.15). Or it could > be a patch that is applied to Fedora but not to RHEL. Either way, No such patch, but there was a big change in PAM RHEL/Fedora patch to sync PAM support in SuSE and RHEL/Fedora. This may be the reason for the difference. > upstream coreutils no longer maintains coreutils (newer distros, such as > Fedora 18, use 'su' from util-linux); furthermore, upstream, we only > focus on fixing current bugs, and not on backporting fixes to older > releases. So your question should be redirected downstream to your > particular distro (that is, please file a support request with Red Hat), > as it is not something we are worried about here. Just to clarify, Fedora 18 still uses su from coreutils (and last version of coreutils with su), the switch to util-linux su was done only in Fedora Rawhide. Yaniv, feel free to email me and Karel Zak (kzak@redhat.com , maintainer of util-linux) if you want to discuss the issue as the distro-related thing. Greetings, Ondrej Vasik From unknown Fri Jun 20 07:25:34 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 12:24:04 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator