>>>>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:01:33 +0200, Thorsten Johannsen said: > > On 23.04.2018 17:30, Martin Simmons wrote: > >> > >> (gdb) > >> (gdb) continue > >> > >> Continuing. > >> [New Thread 0x75c89450 (LWP 8483)] > >> [Thread 0x75c89450 (LWP 8483) exited] > > This looks as expected. > > > > > >> #** at this point bconsole shows "Backup terminated with error** > >> > >> bt > >> thread apply all bt > >> info all > >> x/i $pc > >> x/64i $pc-0x30 > >> > >> > >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> Nothing there. What did I miss? > > After attach and continue, you need to run the job that crashes. Hopefully > > it > > will crash with the segfault again and then you can use bt etc in gdb. > > > > If it doesn't get the segfault in gdb then post the full job output. > > > > __Martin > > > Actually, that's the only thing thatgdb is willing to display: I've run > three incrementatl backup jobs with gdb attached to the bacula-fd daemon > on heRPI02 and the output is always the same: > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > (gdb) attach 8421 > Attaching to process 8421 > [New LWP 8425] > [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] > Using host libthread_db library > "/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libthread_db.so.1". > > 0x76925204 in select () at ../sysdeps/unix/syscall-template.S:84 > 84 ../sysdeps/unix/syscall-template.S: No such file or directory. > (gdb) > (gdb) continue > Continuing. > > > > [New Thread 0x75c89450 (LWP 25801)] > [Thread 0x75c89450 (LWP 25801) exited] > [New Thread 0x75c89450 (LWP 25828)] > [Thread 0x75c89450 (LWP 25828) exited] > [New Thread 0x75c89450 (LWP 25852)] > [Thread 0x75c89450 (LWP 25852) exited]
That is strange. Possibly gdb and/or Linux is broken on that system and fails to catch the signal. Before the continue command, try the command handle SIGSEGV which should print Signal Stop Print Pass to program Description SIGSEGV Yes Yes Yes Segmentation fault If any of the columns contain "No" then do handle SIGSEGV stop print pass continue to see if that works. You could also kill the current bacula-fd process and start it under gdb, also adding the -d999 argument to verify that it still gets the segfault, e.g. sh$ gdb ...path.to.bacula-fd... (gdb) handle SIGSEGV (gdb) run -f -d999 __Martin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
