Comment # 27 on bug 1165351 from Luis Chamberlain

(In reply to Franck Bui from comment #25)
> (In reply to Luis Chamberlain from comment #23)
> > Also, if the culprit is libtirpc function __rpc_dtbsize() shouldn't we be
> > able to proof of concept this easily? And wouldn't this issue be more
> > visible and easier to reproduce elsewhere?
> 
> See previous comments, it's due to the fact __rpc_dtbsize() is called with
> rlimits inherited from PID1.

OK.

> The rlimits of started service are initialized
> *after* the call to initgroups(3).

Are you saying that there is a race between the use of __rpc_dtbsize() and its
initialized values?

What explains that this is not reproducible on a twin system, with the same
software?