Bug #4184

mount will produce invalid fstab records if "options" or "fstype" are unset

Added by Jesse Wolfe almost 2 years ago. Updated 4 months ago.

Status:Needs More Information Start date:07/09/2010
Priority:Normal Due date:
Assignee:Daniel Pittman % Done:

0%
Category:-
Target version:-
Affected Puppet version:0.25.5 Branch:
Keywords:mount fstab
Votes: 0

Description

fstab files are not allowed to have blank columns, but the mount provider will attempt to create a record with blank columns if options or fstab are unset.

Related issues

related to Puppet - Feature #4183: 'replace' should become a metaparameter to allow only man... Accepted 07/08/2010
related to Puppet - Bug #6409: Mount provider should reject spaces in fstab fields Needs More Information 02/22/2011

History

#1
Updated by Jesse Wolfe almost 2 years ago

I’ve got an untested solution at http://github.com/jes5199/puppet/tree/bug/master/4184

#2
Updated by Paul Berry about 1 year ago

  • Assignee changed from Jesse Wolfe to Nigel Kersten

Nigel, this seems related to the work we’re doing on mount points right now (#6409 and #6309). Would you like us to tackle it at the same time?

#3
Updated by Nigel Kersten about 1 year ago

  • Assignee changed from Nigel Kersten to Jesse Wolfe

Yes please.

#4
Updated by James Turnbull about 1 year ago

  • Target version deleted (52)

#5
Updated by Nigel Kersten 8 months ago

  • Assignee deleted (Jesse Wolfe)
  • Keywords set to mount fstab

Unassigning from Jesse, part of the larger refactor.

#6
Updated by Joshua Lifton 5 months ago

Updating tickets assigned to a former Puppet Labs employee.

#7
Updated by Ben Hughes 4 months ago

  • Status changed from Accepted to Unreviewed

#8
Updated by Daniel Pittman 4 months ago

  • Status changed from Unreviewed to Needs Decision
  • Assignee set to Nigel Kersten

Nigel, are we going to ditch the core mount provider in favour of the two-part external version? I fully support that, and would happily ditch this change in reflection of that, but want to confirm first.

If we are going to retain the in-core mount provider, can you unassign this, and set it to pending review, so we can look to Jesse’s code.

#9
Updated by Nigel Kersten 4 months ago

  • Status changed from Needs Decision to Needs More Information
  • Assignee changed from Nigel Kersten to Daniel Pittman

I need more visibility into the status of the split provider as per #6409 :)

Also available in: Atom PDF