lashd 6 doesn't load projects from JFS (patch included)

[danmb]

Binary package hint: lashd

SRU Impact statement:
lashd-0.6.0~rc2-1ubuntu2 (Maverick and Natty) doesn't restore projects from JFS filesystems upon startup.

This is because the code uses an unreliable, non-portable check for dirent.d_type == DT_DIR, which fails on many filesystems, causing lashd to think that the project directories are not, in fact, directories.

Patch / resolution:
The attached 05_stat.patch uses stat / S_ISDIR to properly check dentries (and fixes a similar problem with the lashd "appdb"). It has been tested in my PPA.
Oneiric is not affected, as the lash source package is not available.

Patch for natty-proposed: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/natty/+source/lash/+bug/730633/+attachment/2221562/+files/lash_0.6.0~rc2-5ubuntu0.1.debdiff

TEST CASE:
Install lashd on 11.04 and attempt to load a project hosted on JFS. It will fail.

Regression risk:
Slim to none.

[danmb (danmbox)]

Note, not only JFS is affected. From the readdir() manpage:

Currently, only some file systems (among them: Btrfs, ext2, ext3, and ext4) have full support returning the file type in d_type. All applications must properly handle a return of DT_UNKNOWN.

So, XFS, Reiser, Fuse, and whatever comes in the future might all be affected (sorry, can't check).

[Alessio Treglia (quadrispro)]

Fixed with Debian's 0.6.0~rc2-6 release.

[Alessio Treglia (quadrispro)]

Fixed in Oneiric.

[Clint Byrum (clint-fewbar)]

Hello Daniel Chen and Dan Muresan, thanks so much for the bug fix!

Unfortunately, I have to reject this from the SRU queue.

The patch needs a minimal DEP3 header, with Description, Origin, Author, and any relevant bug references.

I would also disagree with the regression potential of the patch. Stat *is* a very reliable pattern, and this looks like it uses best practices. However, it does change to a different method for this check, and thats more than "slim to no" chance of a regression. Please discuss, in summary, the logic behind the regression potential.

[Clint Byrum (clint-fewbar)]

Oh and I forgot to add, the version is a bit of a confusing thing for this package. It seems that lash was removed from Debian:

http://packages.qa.debian.org/l/lash/news/20110618T093426Z.html

Due to an abandoned upstream. Still, I think the appropriate version for your SRU upload would be:

0.6.0~rc2-5ubuntu0.1

In case there is a new release picked up later, which is numbered

0.6.0~rc2-5ubuntu1

[Clint Byrum (clint-fewbar)]

3rd time is the charm.. what I meant to end that comment with was that the version chosen was correct.

[Rolf Leggewie (r0lf)]

natty has seen the end of its life and is no longer receiving any updates. Marking the natty task for this ticket as "Won't Fix".