rpcbind is enabled by default, and gnome-boxes requires it

[Andrew Lutomirski]

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Simo Sorce <simo at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-04-15 at 08:47 -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>> I don't know whether this should be a gnome-boxes bug, an rpcbind bug,
>> or a FESCo ticket, or something else, so I'm asking here.
>>
>> rpcbind enables itself by default.  This page says that it has a
>> specific exception, so it's okay:
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Starting_services_by_default
>>
>> I assume that the exception comes from the idea that server systems
>> probably want it on if they've installed it.  That may make sense in
>> some contexts.
>>
>> Alas, libvirt-daemon-kvm requires libvirt-daemon-driver-storage, which
>> requires nfs-utils, and nfs-utils requires rpcbind.
>>
>> gnome-boxes, in turn, requires libvirt-daemon-kvm, resulting in this:
>>
>> tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:111             0.0.0.0:*
>> LISTEN      774/rpcbind
>> tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:20048           0.0.0.0:*
>> LISTEN      887/rpc.mountd
>> tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:875             0.0.0.0:*
>> LISTEN      930/rpc.rquotad
>>
>> *on my laptop*
>>
>> IMO this is bad.  Should I file a FESCo ticket asking to revoke the
>> rpcbind and nfs-utils exceptions?  Should I file a bug against
>> libvirt?
>
> Shouldn't rpcbind be simply a dependency for
> nfs-server.service/nfs-secure-server.service and be started only if the
> nfs server is started ?
>

rpcbind has this script:

postinstall scriptlet (using /bin/sh):
if [ $1 -eq 1 ] ; then
    # Initial installation
    /bin/systemctl enable rpcbind.service >/dev/null 2>&1 || :
fi

nfs-utils has this script (excerpted):

postinstall scriptlet (using /bin/sh):
if [ $1 -eq 1 ]; then
    # Package install,
    /bin/systemctl enable nfs.target >/dev/null 2>&1 || :
    /bin/systemctl enable nfs-lock.service >/dev/null 2>&1 || :
    /bin/systemctl start nfs-lock.service >/dev/null 2>&1 || :

nfs-utils is also pulled in by libvirt.

Why is nfs special enough to deserve this kind of automatic
enablement?  I would argue that nfs requires so much manual
configuration in order to do anything useful that requiring admins to
turn it on would be just fine.

--Andy