Processing control commands:
> close -1
Bug #912947 [src:autofs] autofs: new upstream version (5.1.5) available
Marked Bug as done
> fixed -1 5.1.5-1
Bug #912947 {Done: Mike Gabriel }
[src:autofs] autofs: new upstream version (5.1.5) available
Marked as fixed in versions autofs/5
Control: close -1
Hi,
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 14:22:52 +0100 =?utf-8?Q?Manu_Al=C3=A9n?=
wrote:
> Source: autofs
> Hi,
>
> I have worked with autofs and although I’m going to take care of some
packages more, I think that I could have a bit time to support it.
>
> Please do no
Control: close -1
Control: fixed -1 5.1.5-1
Hi Salvatore,
On Mon, 05 Nov 2018 09:25:22 +0100 Salvatore Bonaccorso
wrote:
> Source: autofs
> Severity: wishlist
>
> Hi
>
> There was a new autofs version released (5.1.5) upstream, could it be
> packaged for Debian?
>
Processing control commands:
> close -1
Bug #917228 [src:autofs] autofs: Orphaning package?
Marked Bug as done
--
917228: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=917228
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Your message dated Thu, 14 Mar 2019 19:49:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#892374: fixed in autofs 5.1.5-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #892374,
regarding autofs: can't specify nfsvers=4.1 in auto.master
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has
Your message dated Thu, 14 Mar 2019 19:49:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#737679: fixed in autofs 5.1.5-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #737679,
regarding autofs does not appear to support IPv6 hostname lookups for NFS mounts
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Your message dated Thu, 14 Mar 2019 19:49:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#902565: fixed in autofs 5.1.5-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #902565,
regarding autofs not migrated to salsa.d.o(?)
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Thu, 14 Mar 2019 19:49:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#910367: fixed in autofs 5.1.5-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #910367,
regarding autofs: No way to mount smb share with a dollar sign at the end
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Thu, 14 Mar 2019 19:49:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#784301: fixed in autofs 5.1.5-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #784301,
regarding autofs: BROWSE_MODE in /etc/default/autofs no longer honored.
nobrowse in auto.master is.
to be marked as done.
This means
Your message dated Thu, 14 Mar 2019 19:49:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#842199: fixed in autofs 5.1.5-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #842199,
regarding autofs should pull in network-online.target and nfs-client.target and
related issues
to be marked as done.
This means that
Your message dated Thu, 14 Mar 2019 19:49:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#901554: fixed in autofs 5.1.5-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #901554,
regarding autofs: please add DEP8 tests
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this
Your message dated Thu, 14 Mar 2019 19:49:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#805028: fixed in autofs 5.1.5-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #805028,
regarding autofs-ldap fails to start when /etc/autofs_ldap_auth.conf has wrong
permissions
to be marked as done.
This means that you
Your message dated Thu, 14 Mar 2019 19:49:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#787202: fixed in autofs 5.1.5-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #787202,
regarding Regression: autofs 5.1.1 can't access "hidden" samba shares, 5.0.8
can.
to be marked as done.
This means
Your message dated Thu, 14 Mar 2019 19:49:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#757038: fixed in autofs 5.1.5-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #757038,
regarding autofs: FTBFS with clang instead of gcc
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with
Your message dated Thu, 14 Mar 2019 19:49:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#709366: fixed in autofs 5.1.5-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #709366,
regarding autofs: automount doesn't work with numerical IPv6 address
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the pr
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi Philippe,
On Wed, 22 May 2013 21:22:06 +0200 Philippe Latu
wrote:
> Package: autofs
> Version: 5.0.7-3
> Severity: wishlist
>
> Dear Maintainer,
> *** Please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***
>
> * What led up t
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 moreinfo
Bug #709366 [autofs] autofs: automount doesn't work with numerical IPv6 address
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
709366: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=709366
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 wontfix
Bug #708256 [autofs] wheezy autofs /usr/sbin/automount crashes
Added tag(s) wontfix.
> close -1
Bug #708256 [autofs] wheezy autofs /usr/sbin/automount crashes
Marked Bug as done
--
708256: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=
onfirm the segfaults also with a non-mixed
> >setup, that is, a i386 kernel with i386 userland, or an amd64 kernel
> >with amd64 userland?
>
> With a non-mixed setup, there is no problem. Thanks, --John
>
Well then, we won't fix this for wheezy anymore and it may even not be
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi,
On Sun, 07 May 2017 10:22:06 +0500 Anton Karmanov
wrote:
> Package: autofs
> Version: 5.0.8-2+deb8u1
> Severity: important
>
> Dear Maintainer,
> I'am trying to get autofs package whith apt on an arm64 machine.
> During insta
Hi,
On Fri, 05 Oct 2018 14:18:08 +0200 Vincent Danjean
wrote:
> Package: autofs
> Version: 5.1.2-1
> Severity: important
>
> Hi,
>
> Since stretch update, there is no way to automount a smb share with a
'$' at
> the end of its name anymore. But these nam
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 moreinfo
Bug #861992 [autofs] autofs: Fail while installing (arm64)
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
861992: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=861992
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
CVE-2018-1108 being reverted (temporarily ?), as
per DSA 2018-4096: https://www.debian.org/security/2018/dsa-4196
> --
> Cédric Dufour @ Idiap Research Institute
I will close this bug for now. I agree that waiting for entropy is
something that service should avoid.
And I also agree tha
Processing control commands:
> close -1
Bug #897897 [autofs] Kernel security fix (for CVE-2018-1108) -> AutoFS won't
start
Marked Bug as done
--
897897: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=897897
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: fixed -1 5.1.0-1
Control: tags -1 jessie
HI,
On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 16:05:17 -0400 Colten Levi
wrote:
> Package: autofs
> Version: 5.0.8-2+deb8u1
> Severity: important
> Tags: patch
>
> * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
> ineffective)?
Processing control commands:
> fixed -1 5.1.0-1
Bug #832628 [autofs] autofs: Autofs does not unmount mounted filesystems after
HUP
Marked as fixed in versions autofs/5.1.0-1.
> tags -1 jessie
Bug #832628 [autofs] autofs: Autofs does not unmount mounted filesystems after
HUP
Added tag(s)
Hi Daniel,
I am currently adopting the orphaned autofs package. The issue you
reported here as something that we have been observing in Debian Edu
deployments for years. Thanks for proposing a fix.
On Wed, 26 Oct 2016 13:28:01 -0700 Daniel Lakeland
wrote:
>
> Package: autofs
>
autofs 5.1.2-4 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2019-03-24
It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs:
921761: sssd: FTBFS (failing tests)
Control: reassign -1 libkrb5-3 1.16.2-1
Control: affects -1 autofs-ldap
> After the latest upgrade of libkrb5-3 (1.16.1-1 -> 1.16.2-1) automount
> starts but dies immediately after accessing a automounter point.
>
> Automount is configured to authenticate via GSSAPI using system
Processing control commands:
> reassign -1 libkrb5-3 1.16.2-1
Bug #918088 [autofs-ldap] autofs-ldap: automount dies with SIGABRT after
libkrb5-3 upgrade - "(k5_mutex_lock: Assertion `r == 0' failed.)"
Bug reassigned from package 'autofs-ldap' to 'libkrb5-3'.
#18 0x7f875812e637 in ?? () from
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/sasl2/libgssapiv2.so
#19 0x7f8758f6202d in sasl_client_step () from
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsasl2.so.2
#20 0x7f8758f62644 in sasl_client_start () from
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsasl2.so.2
#21 0x00007f875900b6c4 in s
Package: autofs-ldap
Version: 5.1.2-4
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Good morning.
After the latest upgrade of libkrb5-3 (1.16.1-1 -> 1.16.2-1) automount
starts but dies immediately after accessing a automounter point.
Automount is configured to authenticate via GSS
autofs 5.1.2-4 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2019-01-01
It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs:
913403: sssd: sssd FTBFS with curl 7.62.0
autofs 5.1.2-4 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2018-12-24
It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs:
913403: sssd: sssd FTBFS with curl 7.62.0
Source: autofs
Severity: wishlist
Hi
There was a new autofs version released (5.1.5) upstream, could it be
packaged for Debian?
Regards,
Salvatore
Package: autofs
Version: 5.1.2-1
Severity: important
Hi,
Since stretch update, there is no way to automount a smb share with a '$' at
the end of its name anymore. But these names are automaticcaly generated by
windows when the share is hidden by default...
The auto.smb script
Hi Daniel
What is the state of the bug?
Add the following line to autofs.system
Not autofs.service ?
Best,
autofs 5.1.2-4 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2018-08-29
It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs:
903917: libsss-sudo: libsss-sudo.postinst clobbers local change to
/etc/nsswitch.conf
905220: sssd-tools: /usr/sbin/sss_obfuscate fails to run: ImportError: No
module named
It seems it was a generic kernel bug which was fixed between 4.17.6 and 4.17.8.
autofs 5.1.2-4 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2018-08-29
It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs:
903917: libsss-sudo: libsss-sudo.postinst clobbers local change to
/etc/nsswitch.conf
Your message dated Mon, 09 Jul 2018 00:34:21 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#903167: fixed in autofs 5.1.2-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #903167,
regarding autofs: FTBFS in buster/sid (dh_installman: Cannot find
"debian/tmp/usr/share/man/man5/autofs_ldap_auth.conf.conf.5&qu
ar/run \
sssldir=/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/sssd/modules \
dh_auto_configure -- \
--disable-mount-locking \
--enable-force-shutdown \
[... snipped ...]
Installed package default configuration as "autofs.conf".
Installing autofs init configuation in /etc/default
'autof
Package: autofs
Severity: normal
I was trying to find the autofs source on salsa and was unable to
after a fair bit of rummaging around.
The old alioth repo is archived at [1].
Is it possible to migrate it to salsa, from that tar ball?
Kind regards
Vince
[1] https://alioth-archive.debian.org
Package: autofs
Version: 5.1.2-3
Severity: normal
Hi,
I recently added smb and nfs dep8 tests to autofs in ubuntu. The
Ubuntu test results are here:
http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/autofs
Here is the output of a dep8 run on a Debian testing VM:
http://people.ubuntu.com/~ahasenack/autofs
Package: autofs
Version: 5.1.2-3
Severity: normal
Hi,
Ubuntu has had -Bsymbolic-functions enabled in its build flags for
quite some time. Some packages don't work with that flag set, and it's
then disabled on a case by case basis.. One such package is autofs.
There have been various
autofs 5.1.2-3 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2018-06-11
It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs:
877091: sssd: getent crashes while trying to display a group provided by sssd
It seems this problem is adressed more globally as per bug #897599:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=897599
Which led to fix for CVE-2018-1108 being reverted (temporarily ?), as per DSA
2018-4096: https://www.debian.org/security/2018/dsa-4196
--
Cédric Dufour @ Idiap Research I
autofs 5.1.2-3 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2018-06-11
It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs:
877091: sssd: getent crashes while trying to display a group provided by sssd
Package: autofs
Version: 5.1.2-1
Severity: important
Hello,
Following latest Debian/Stretch kernel (security) update - and the fix for
CVE-2018-1108 - autofs blocks until the kernel RNG reports its proper
initialization ("random: crng init done" in dmesg), which can take up to
Package: autofs
Version: 5.1.2-3
Upgrading autofs from autofs_5.1.2-2 to -3 version creates runtime
crashes on the hppa architecture. Haven't done any further analyzes yet,
but it's critical to get it fixed, because our debian buildd servers
on hppa use /boot mounted via a
Package: autofs
Version: 5.1.2-1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: fixed-upstream
The versions of autofs currently in Debian do not support nfsvers=4.1 or
nfsvers=4.2 as a map option in the auto.master map. This makes it inconvenient
to force one of these protocols for every mount, as one needs to add the
Your message dated Sat, 17 Feb 2018 21:49:21 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#887284: fixed in autofs 5.1.2-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #887284,
regarding autofs should build-depend and recommend e2fsprogs
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 22:24:44 +0100
Source: autofs
Binary: autofs autofs-ldap autofs-hesiod
Architecture: source
Version: 5.1.2-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian QA Group
Changed-By: Andreas Henriksson
Processing control commands:
> retitle -1 autofs should build-depend and recommend e2fsprogs
Bug #887284 [autofs] autofs should depend on e2fsprogs explicitly
Changed Bug title to 'autofs should build-depend and recommend e2fsprogs' from
'autofs should depend on e2fsprogs expl
Control: retitle -1 autofs should build-depend and recommend e2fsprogs
Control: tags -1 + confirmed
On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 08:02:46PM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> Package: autofs
[...]
> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/autofs/mount_ext2.so contains fsck.ext2, fsck.ext3
> and fsck.ext4. Acc
Now that this bug has a patch, is there any chance we can get it pushed
in time for the next Ubuntu LTS release? It would be a shame to go
another two years without this fix.
Package: autofs
Version: 5.1.2-2
User: helm...@debian.org
Usertags: nonessentiale2fsprogs
Dear maintainer,
We want to make removing e2fsprogs from installations possible. For standard
installations this is not useful, but embedded applications and chroots benefit
from such an option. For
Your message dated Sat, 18 Dec 2004 06:17:13 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#211943: fixed in autofs 4.1.3-7
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it
Your message dated Sat, 18 Dec 2004 06:17:13 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#282981: fixed in autofs 4.1.3-7
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it
> "SHG" == Steinar H Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Steinar!
>> /usr/sbin/automount --timeout=300 /home yp auto_home
>> -rsize=32768,wsize=32768,intr,-proto=udp,intr,vers=3
>> /usr/sbin/automount --timeout=300 /neti yp auto_neti
>> -rsize=32768,wsize=32768,intr,-intr,vers=3
ents on BTS. I have
> > a working NIS environment here, just if you need a testbed or something.
>
> If you could test and verify the patch for #278229, that would be very good.
>
> > BTW, i did try to subscribe the autofs devel list, without results.
> > I think communicat
something.
If you could test and verify the patch for #278229, that would be very good.
> BTW, i did try to subscribe the autofs devel list, without results.
> I think communicating a few patches and comments upstream is mandatory
> for autofs...
Yes, indeed. I don't even know the up
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 01:23:55PM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> I'm currently preparing to take over autofs (as should be evident from my
> recent activity in the BTS :-) ), but I'm awaiting the response on
> #278229 (to find out if the patch is worthwhile or not), and
Hi,
I'm currently preparing to take over autofs (as should be evident from my
recent activity in the BTS :-) ), but I'm awaiting the response on
#278229 (to find out if the patch is worthwhile or not), and I'll have to
find out what went wrong in the previous parse_sun.c patch
stem wrote:
> Package: autofs
> Version: 3.9.99-4.0.0pre10-16
> Severity: normal
>
>
> okay. when a floppy drive is accessed, and there happens not to be a
> floppy in the drive, you get an error "directory does not exist".
>
> then you put a floppy _in_ th
reopen 280706
severity 280706 wishlist
retitle 280706 Please improve the error message given when using relative paths
thanks
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 09:46:03PM +0100, Francesco Paolo Lovergine wrote:
>>> Do not use relative paths or symlinks in auto.master, please.
>> In that case, 280706 is not
Your message dated Wed, 8 Dec 2004 23:00:37 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line autofs: no kernel notifications for a "missing" or unmountable
mount point (e.g. floppy)
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reopen 280706
Bug#280706: autofs: Fails to mount specified mountpoints. No logging output.
Bug reopened, originator not changed.
> severity 280706 wishlist
Bug#280706: autofs: Fails to mount specified mountpoints. No logging output.
Severity
ctory does not exist".
> >
> > then you put a floppy _in_ the drive and access it and it
> > _still_ says "directory does not exist".
> >
> > 30 seconds _later_ is a different story: access is granted.
> >
> > ... what gives???
&
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # These are not the same bugs!
> unmerge 280120
Bug#280120: autofs: Broken parsing on tabs after options
Bug#280234: Another whitespace handling bug - program maps this time
Bug#282981: Autofs breaks if map has not trailing newline
Disconnected #
On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 08:41:40PM +0100, "Dr. Andreas Krüger" wrote:
> After a recent update, part of my autofs - setup, that used to run
> smoothly, suddenly broke. I had a /etc/auto.something map, intended to
> magically mount a subdirectory of /something, with indeed on
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 11:20:19AM +0100, Anders Boström wrote:
> SHG> Take a look at the patch for #280209 -- this is a duplicate, and the
> patch
> SHG> there should help for this bug as well, of course. If it helps people,
> I'll
> SHG> put it into the next upl
Your message dated Wed, 8 Dec 2004 12:24:32 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line autofs: Fails to mount specified mountpoints. No logging
output.
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt wi
master "+" syntax doesn't support options
Merged 278229 280809.
> tag 278229 +patch
Bug#278229: auto.master "+" syntax doesn't support options
Tags were: patch
Bug#280809: auto.master "+" syntax doesn't support options
Tags added: patch
> t
Your message dated Wed, 08 Dec 2004 05:32:05 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#279627: fixed in autofs 4.1.3-6
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it
the patch for #280209 -- this is a duplicate, and the patch
SHG> there should help for this bug as well, of course. If it helps people,
I'll
SHG> put it into the next upload of autofs.
The patch in 280209 is broken, it don't work at all if options is used
in the nis-ma
on Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 12:17:10AM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson ([EMAIL
PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 11:57:33PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > misc/etc/auto.misc
> > net /etc/auto.net
>
> This is indeed what is causing the problems. /et
Bug#280209: ITP: codeville -- More anarchic revision control system [non-free]
Tags were: patch
Tags removed: patch
> # do what I intended to do last time
> retitle 280809 auto.master "+" syntax doesn't support options
Bug#280809: autofs: options are disregarded
Chan
Your message dated Wed, 8 Dec 2004 02:12:32 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Closing #77065 (autofs: documentation about nis maps is
irritating)
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt wi
access it and it
> _still_ says "directory does not exist".
>
> 30 seconds _later_ is a different story: access is granted.
>
> ... what gives???
Is this really an autofs bug, or are you complaining about the kernel not
notifying autofs somehow? (In the latter case, t
ed feature to pass options to
> "+"-entries.
Take a look at the patch for #280209 -- this is a duplicate, and the patch
there should help for this bug as well, of course. If it helps people, I'll
put it into the next upload of autofs.
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
rol system [non-free]
Changed Bug title.
> merge 280209 278229
Bug#278229: auto.master "+" syntax doesn't support options
Bug#280209: auto.master "+" syntax doesn't support options
Mismatch - only Bugs in same state can be merged:
Values for `package' don'
On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 03:15:05PM -0500, Matthias G. Imhof wrote:
> We are using NIS maps. For remote login, the rsize and wsize needs to be
> reduced. In earlier versions of autofs, option in /etc/auto.master were
> honored.
They are still honored, but they do not seem to be honored on
On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 11:57:33PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> misc /etc/auto.misc
> net /etc/auto.net
This is indeed what is causing the problems. /etc/init.d/autofs reads
getmounts | while read cmd rest
do
mnt=`echo $rest | sed 's/^.* \(\/[^ ]*\) [A-Za-z].*$/\1/&#
0:47:48 GMT
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by karajan.it.uc3m.es (8.12.1/8.12.1/Debian -5) id g1JKlikH002863;
Tue, 19 Feb 2002 20:47:44 GMT
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 20:47:44 GMT
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: elm-me+: elm stats dire
85 matches
Mail list logo
