[CentOS] BackupPC won't fork after CentOS 5.2 upgrade

Tue Jul 8 23:48:58 UTC 2008
Ben <abnormaliti at clivepeeters.com.au>

Johnny Hughes wrote:
> Ben wrote:
>> Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>> Ben wrote:
>>>> Ben wrote:
>>>>> For some time now i have been running BackupPC 3.1.0 on CentOS 5.1 
>>>>> x86_64 however after upgrading to CentOS 5.2 BackupPC will not start.
>>>>>
>>>>> "sudo /etc/init.d/backuppc start" return OK but there is no 
>>>>> BackupPC processes.
>>>>>
>>>>> This fails also.
>>>>> # sudo -u backuppc /usr/bin/BackupPC -d
>>>>> # echo $?
>>>>> 0
>>>>>
>>>>> This succeeds, but of course does not fork.
>>>>> # sudo -u backuppc /usr/bin/BackupPC
>>>>>
>>>>> So for some reason after the CentOS 5.2 upgrade it will not fork 
>>>>> into the background.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have run the perl debugger over it and up until the fork 
>>>>> everything is fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing appears in the LOG.
>>>>>
>>>> With some help from the BackupPC list i have narrowed the problem 
>>>> down to the NSS config, I use LDAP to resolve users and groups.
>>>>
>>>> In /etc/nsswitch.conf this is what is there and was there with 
>>>> CentOS 5.1, with this config BackupPC will not background.
>>>> <snip>
>>>> passwd:     files ldap
>>>> shadow:     files ldap
>>>> group:      files ldap
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> However, with this in nsswitch.conf the service will background.
>>>> <snip>
>>>> passwd:     files ldap
>>>> shadow:     files
>>>> group:      files ldap
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> Apparently this has been seen to affect dhcpd too, but with the 
>>>> "services" nss database.
>>>>
>>>> Any ideas on this?  What has changed between 5.1 and 5.2?
>>>
>>> Look in the release notes for C5 (search for nss_ldap):
>>>
>>> http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS5.2
>>>
>>> Try my fixed RPM here:
>>>
>>> http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/nss_ldap/5/
>>>
>>> Upstream bugzilla entry here:
>>>
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448014
>>
>> Thanks for the pointer.
>>
>> Is your RPM any different to the one the Testing Repo as documented 
>> in the release notes?
>
> It is the same RPM, just in a different place so I can link it from 
> the RH bugzilla entry too.
Thanks Johnny, i went and applied the RPM from testing and all works as 
expected.

Thanks for your help.

Ben