[arch-general] sendfax: 460 Failed to submit job 110: Unable to open scheduler FIFO: No such device or address.

[David C. Rankin]

All,

After recent updates, hylafax/sendfax fails with the error:

sendfax: 460 Failed to submit job 110: Unable to open scheduler FIFO: No such
device or address.

it had been working find up until the last week or two. Reverting to the LTS
kernel resolves the issue. There are no obvious errors in the journal.

Does anyone know why sendfax would begin failing with "Unable to open
scheduler FIFO: No such device or address." with the current kernel, but work
fine on LTS?

(I have confirmed this behavior on two separate Arch servers)

[David C. Rankin]

Post by David C. Rankin
All,
sendfax: 460 Failed to submit job 110: Unable to open scheduler FIFO: No such
device or address.
it had been working find up until the last week or two. Reverting to the LTS
kernel resolves the issue. There are no obvious errors in the journal.
Does anyone know why sendfax would begin failing with "Unable to open
scheduler FIFO: No such device or address." with the current kernel, but work
fine on LTS?
(I have confirmed this behavior on two separate Arch servers)

The last successful outbound fax before this failure began was 9/19. Since
that time the only relevant updates have been:

linux (4.18.8.arch1-1 -> 4.18.9.arch1-1)
hylafax (6.0.6-8 -> 6.0.7-1)

Since hylafax 6.0.7-1 works fine with LTS, that points to linux 4.18.9 being
the problem.

What would I check to determine why sendfax is unable to open scheduler FIFO
(No such device or address) when running on linux 4.18.9? Permissions under
/var/spool/hylafax are the same under both kernels:


# l /var/spool/hylafax/
total 76
drwxr-xr-x 17 uucp uucp 4096 Sep 25 22:16 .
drwxr-xr-x 10 root root 4096 Dec 29 2013 ..
drwx------ 2 uucp uucp 4096 May 21 2013 archive
drwxr-xr-x 2 uucp uucp 4096 Sep 25 22:16 bin
drwxr-xr-x 2 uucp uucp 4096 Sep 26 15:49 client
drwxr-xr-x 2 uucp uucp 4096 Sep 25 22:16 config
drwxr-xr-x 2 uucp uucp 4096 Oct 23 2017 dev
drwx------ 2 uucp uucp 4096 Sep 26 15:49 docq
drwx------ 2 uucp uucp 4096 Sep 20 00:00 doneq
drwxr-xr-x 3 uucp uucp 4096 Sep 26 00:00 etc
drwxr-xr-x 2 uucp uucp 4096 Sep 19 15:12 info
drwxr-xr-x 2 uucp uucp 4096 Sep 26 10:25 log
drwx------ 2 uucp uucp 4096 May 21 2013 pollq
drwxr-xr-x 2 uucp uucp 4096 Sep 26 10:25 recvq
drwx------ 2 uucp uucp 4096 Sep 26 15:49 sendq
drwxr-xr-x 2 uucp uucp 4096 Oct 23 2017 status
drwx------ 2 uucp uucp 4096 Sep 26 15:49 tmp
-r--r--r-- 1 root root 5426 Sep 25 07:29 COPYRIGHT
prw------- 1 uucp uucp 0 Sep 25 07:29 FIFO
prw------- 1 uucp uucp 0 Sep 20 19:57 FIFO.ttyS0

The FIFO is there owned by uucp:uucp in both cases. Did the latest kernel
tighten some type of security that would effect mkfifo for hylafax in some way?

This caught me somewhat off-guard as both Arch servers are used in a
production capacity and I had a fax that needed to go to Scottsdale before
close of business.

Any thoughts welcomed. I'll also post to the hylafax list and report back if
there is any information there.

[David C. Rankin]

Post by David C. Rankin
Any thoughts welcomed. I'll also post to the hylafax list and report back if
there is any information there.

I haven't heard back on the hylafax list yet, but this error is reproducible
on Arch 4.18.9 with a simple example, e.g.

$ sendfax -vv -n -d 5551212 anyfile.pdf
...
460 Failed to submit job 130: Unable to open scheduler FIFO: No such device
or address.
460 Failed to submit job 130: Unable to open scheduler FIFO: No such device
or address.

Simply rebooting to LTS (4.14.71) and the command succeeds without any problem.

Is anyone else seeing this?

[David C. Rankin]

This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.