Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

node: ignore exit status when starting portmap #535

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

iwd32900
Copy link

@iwd32900 iwd32900 commented Jun 5, 2015

This fix continues the work of a23866d, which only hit one of two calls to portmap.

This fix continues the work of a23866d, which only hit one of two calls to portmap.
@cancan101
Copy link

This does not seem like a right solution to the problem.

@iwd32900
Copy link
Author

iwd32900 commented Jun 7, 2015

It may not be an ideal solution, but it works, and it's the one that was previously implemented incompletely. Whatever solution is ultimately adopted, it should be applied in both places.

As noted in the older commit's message, the portmap calls are only needed for older versions of Ubuntu. Newer versions use rpcbind instead, and don't seem to need any call at all in this location.

However, the fact that StarCluster calls portmap and cares whether it succeeds is causing problems for everyone who wants to use StarCluster with Ubuntu 14.04 LTS. (Since 13.04 is now EOL, the only supported official AMI is 12.04 LTS.) Unfortunately there is not an official 14.04 AMI yet. But to make it work, people have to create a fake portmap that is basically /bin/true. If we ignore the return value, modern Ubuntu is one step closer to working out of the box, and these calls to portmap could eventually be retired.

@cancan101
Copy link

Why not check for the existence for rpcbind or portmap and just call the right one?

@cancan101
Copy link

Along the lines of #435

@iwd32900
Copy link
Author

iwd32900 commented Jun 8, 2015

This request is redundant with #435, and it does have a nicer solution. If that one is going to be merged, then please disregard this one.

@LinusU LinusU mentioned this pull request Sep 1, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants