Bug#644948: nfs-common: Wrong uid/gid with latest version using NFSv4
Anders Boström wrote:
> >>>>> "SW" == Stephan Windmüller <windy@white-hawk.de> writes:
>
> SW> On 23.10.2011 13:49, Jamie Heilman wrote:
> >> Chances are you all have your nfsidmap Domain mismatched between
> >> client and server; check your user.* syslog logs on the client for
> >> messages like: nfsidmap: nss_getpwnam: name 'foo@bar' does not map
> >> into domain 'baz'
>
> SW> In my configuration both domains (client and server) are correctly set,
> SW> but this is not the issue: passwd and group data is fetched from ldap as
> SW> set in nsswitch.conf, but idmapd does not seem to respect these settings.
>
> And in my configuration, both domains (client and server) are also
> correctly set. And the only messages from nfsidmap in syslog is a
> message stating that the correct domain is used. In my case, NIS is
> used for passwd and group data.
>
> The server is using nfs-common 1:1.2.2-4 . Switching back to 1:1.2.4-1
> on the client solves the problem.
In theory setting Verbosity to 4 in idmapd.conf and comparing the
logged results between 1:1.2.4-1 and 1:1.2.5-2 should help identify
the regression. In practice, it might require deeper introspection.
Is your client kernel configured with NFS_USE_NEW_IDMAPPER? If so,
setting Verbosity to 4 on the client probably won't help (still
potentially useful on the server though). What you can do is
configure a simple wrapper for nfsidmap and configure that to be
called in request-key.conf. Maybe something like:
#!/bin/sh
echo "$0 $@" | /usr/bin/logger -p local0.debug
exec /usr/sbin/nfsidmap "$@"
Then atleast you can keep track of what the client is looking up.
OTOH, if you're not using a kernel with NFS_USE_NEW_IDMAPPER set,
setting Verbosity to 4 in idmapd.conf should help spot the difference.
--
Jamie Heilman http://audible.transient.net/~jamie/
"I was in love once -- a Sinclair ZX-81. People said, "No, Holly,
she's not for you." She was cheap, she was stupid and she wouldn't
load -- well, not for me, anyway." -Holly
Reply to: