I don't know how the loader works on OSX, but that seems somewhat
unlikely to me - either it should be complaining that the APR library
doesn't exist, or something related to APR should be in the stack
trace.
Unfortunately at this moment I'm just guessing wildly as to what the
issue may be. Without a reproducible setup there's only a limited
amount that I can do to help.
-Robert Middleton
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 9:46 AM Bob Kirnum <bkir...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The example applications (at least trivial and console) run fine so dynamic
> loading alone is not an issue (there are no static libs built). I do see
> that we only reference the liblog4cxx library in our makefile while the
> examples also reference the apr / apu libraries. Perhaps we need to tweak
> our makefiles?
>
> From your liblog4cxx.pc.in . . .
>
> <<
> Libs: -L${libdir} -llog4cxx
> Cflags: -I${includedir}
> Requires.private: apr-1 apr-util-1
> >>
>
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 9:29 AM Robert Middleton <rmiddle...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > As far as I'm aware, the unit tests do use the dynamic library.
> > Looking at the stacktrace, I would expect the '--version' argument to
> > not work, since it seems to be happening before main() - my suspicion
> > is that your code has another static initialization(unrelated to
> > log4cxx) someplace, that is messing with memory.
> >
> > I'm not sure how much you know about the startup sequence, so here's a
> > quick overview.
> > When a C++ application starts up, it is going to run through all of
> > the static constructors. Log4cxx has a lot of these in it. So if
> > your code looks like this:
> >
> > static log4cxx::Logger logger = log4cxx::LogManager::getLogger( "foo" );
> > int main(){
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > the constructor for 'logger' happens before main is run. In this
> > particular case, it seems that the classnamepatternconverter is trying
> > to register with the Log4cxx core, so that log4cxx will know how to
> > load the class. Perhaps it loads them in alphabetical order?
> >
> > This SO post may provide some insight:
> >
> > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/335369/finding-c-static-initialization-order-problems
> >
> > -Robert Middleton
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 7:18 AM Bob Kirnum <bkir...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hey Robert,
> > >
> > > I agree that the socket issue is most likely unrelated. I'll try to look
> > > at this.
> > >
> > > I just noticed that our application supports '--version' which simply
> > > prints the version and exits. Even using this results in the same
> > segfault
> > > so it seems the issue is more related to dynamic loading of the log4cxx
> > > library. Anyway, below is the initialization our code has been using
> > for a
> > > while now. Have not seen such a crash until now using Monterey. I see
> > no
> > > reference to our code in the back trace, just the dynamic library
> > loading.
> > > Do the unit tests also use the dynamic library?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Bob
> > >
> > > <<
> > > int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
> > > IGNORE_WARNINGS_ASIO;
> > > if (2 == argc && 0 == strcmp("--version", argv[1])) {
> > > printVersion();
> > > return 0;
> > > } else if (3 != argc) {
> > > printUsage();
> > > return 1;
> > > }
> > >
> > > std::string logging_property_file(argv[2]);
> > >
> > > if (stringEndsWith(logging_property_file, ".xml")) {
> > >
> > log4cxx::xml::DOMConfigurator::configure(logging_property_file.c_str());
> > > } else {
> > > PropertyConfigurator::configure(logging_property_file.c_str());
> > > }
> > > >>
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 4:15 PM Robert Middleton <rmiddle...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > The 'socketservertestcase' is probably not related to the issue at
> > > > all, but I've said that before about plenty of things and been wrong,
> > > > so I would recommend that you look into the reason that's failing
> > > > first. You may need to run the test manually in order to get more
> > > > useful output information. (maybe you don't have Java installed?)
> > > >
> > > > Otherwise since it looks like the crash is happening early in
> > > > startup(before main), my best guess is that there is something in your
> > > > code that is messing with the startup sequence - overwriting memory
> > > > someplace? If it was a problem with log4cxx directly, I would expect
> > > > that all of the tests would fail with the same error.
> > > >
> > > > -Robert Middleton
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 2:38 PM Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Could this be a firewall configuration issue?
> > > > >
> > > > > Matt Sicker
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Oct 27, 2021, at 11:52, Bob Kirnum <bkir...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am concerned that something may have changed on my system not
> > > > directly
> > > > > > related to the Monterey upgrade. We normally just use the dynamic
> > > > library,
> > > > > > I only built it now in order to help debug the issue. I was
> > getting
> > > > the
> > > > > > same segmentation fault prior to building from source.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Just ran the unit tests, all but one passes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > make test
> > > > > > Running tests...
> > > > > > Test project /Users/bkirnum/Documents/GitHub/logging-log4cxx/build
> > > > > > Start 1: asyncappendertestcase
> > > > > > 1/62 Test #1: asyncappendertestcase .................. Passed
> > > > 23.82
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 2: consoleappendertestcase
> > > > > > 2/62 Test #2: consoleappendertestcase ................ Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 3: decodingtest
> > > > > > 3/62 Test #3: decodingtest ........................... Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 4: encodingtest
> > > > > > 4/62 Test #4: encodingtest ........................... Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 5: fileappendertest
> > > > > > 5/62 Test #5: fileappendertest ....................... Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 6: filetestcase
> > > > > > 6/62 Test #6: filetestcase ........................... Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 7: hierarchytest
> > > > > > 7/62 Test #7: hierarchytest .......................... Passed
> > > > 0.07
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 8: hierarchythresholdtestcase
> > > > > > 8/62 Test #8: hierarchythresholdtestcase ............. Passed
> > > > 0.09
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 9: jsonlayouttest
> > > > > > 9/62 Test #9: jsonlayouttest ......................... Passed
> > > > 0.10
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 10: l7dtestcase
> > > > > > 10/62 Test #10: l7dtestcase ............................ Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 11: leveltestcase
> > > > > > 11/62 Test #11: leveltestcase .......................... Passed
> > > > 0.07
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 12: loggertestcase
> > > > > > 12/62 Test #12: loggertestcase ......................... Passed
> > > > 0.19
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 13: mdctestcase
> > > > > > 13/62 Test #13: mdctestcase ............................ Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 14: minimumtestcase
> > > > > > 14/62 Test #14: minimumtestcase ........................ Passed
> > > > 0.10
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 15: ndctestcase
> > > > > > 15/62 Test #15: ndctestcase ............................ Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 16: patternlayouttest
> > > > > > 16/62 Test #16: patternlayouttest ...................... Passed
> > > > 0.14
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 17: propertyconfiguratortest
> > > > > > 17/62 Test #17: propertyconfiguratortest ............... Passed
> > > > 0.28
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 18: rollingfileappendertestcase
> > > > > > 18/62 Test #18: rollingfileappendertestcase ............ Passed
> > > > 0.10
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 19: streamtestcase
> > > > > > 19/62 Test #19: streamtestcase ......................... Passed
> > > > 2.32
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 20: multithreadtest
> > > > > > 20/62 Test #20: multithreadtest ........................ Passed
> > > > 0.26
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 21: absolutetimedateformattestcase
> > > > > > 21/62 Test #21: absolutetimedateformattestcase ......... Passed
> > > > 0.07
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 22: cacheddateformattestcase
> > > > > > 22/62 Test #22: cacheddateformattestcase ............... Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 23: casttestcase
> > > > > > 23/62 Test #23: casttestcase ........................... Passed
> > > > 0.07
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 24: charsetdecodertestcase
> > > > > > 24/62 Test #24: charsetdecodertestcase ................. Passed
> > > > 0.07
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 25: charsetencodertestcase
> > > > > > 25/62 Test #25: charsetencodertestcase ................. Passed
> > > > 0.20
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 26: cyclicbuffertestcase
> > > > > > 26/62 Test #26: cyclicbuffertestcase ................... Passed
> > > > 0.12
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 27: datetimedateformattestcase
> > > > > > 27/62 Test #27: datetimedateformattestcase ............. Passed
> > > > 0.16
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 28: filewatchdogtest
> > > > > > 28/62 Test #28: filewatchdogtest ....................... Passed
> > > > 0.13
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 29: inetaddresstestcase
> > > > > > 29/62 Test #29: inetaddresstestcase .................... Passed
> > > > 0.13
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 30: iso8601dateformattestcase
> > > > > > 30/62 Test #30: iso8601dateformattestcase .............. Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 31: messagebuffertest
> > > > > > 31/62 Test #31: messagebuffertest ...................... Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 32: optionconvertertestcase
> > > > > > 32/62 Test #32: optionconvertertestcase ................ Passed
> > > > 0.10
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 33: propertiestestcase
> > > > > > 33/62 Test #33: propertiestestcase ..................... Passed
> > > > 0.15
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 34: relativetimedateformattestcase
> > > > > > 34/62 Test #34: relativetimedateformattestcase ......... Passed
> > > > 0.07
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 35: stringhelpertestcase
> > > > > > 35/62 Test #35: stringhelpertestcase ................... Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 36: stringtokenizertestcase
> > > > > > 36/62 Test #36: stringtokenizertestcase ................ Passed
> > > > 0.07
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 37: syslogwritertest
> > > > > > 37/62 Test #37: syslogwritertest ....................... Passed
> > > > 0.11
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 38: timezonetestcase
> > > > > > 38/62 Test #38: timezonetestcase ....................... Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 39: transcodertestcase
> > > > > > 39/62 Test #39: transcodertestcase ..................... Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 40: threadutilitytestcase
> > > > > > 40/62 Test #40: threadutilitytestcase .................. Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 41: xloggertestcase
> > > > > > 41/62 Test #41: xloggertestcase ........................ Passed
> > > > 0.09
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 42: defaultinittestcase
> > > > > > 42/62 Test #42: defaultinittestcase .................... Passed
> > > > 0.10
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 43: filtertests
> > > > > > 43/62 Test #43: filtertests ............................ Passed
> > > > 0.10
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 44: socketappendertestcase
> > > > > > 44/62 Test #44: socketappendertestcase ................. Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 45: sockethubappendertestcase
> > > > > > 45/62 Test #45: sockethubappendertestcase .............. Passed
> > > > 2.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 46: syslogappendertestcase
> > > > > > 46/62 Test #46: syslogappendertestcase ................. Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 47: telnetappendertestcase
> > > > > > 47/62 Test #47: telnetappendertestcase ................. Passed
> > > > 2.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 48: xmlsocketappendertestcase
> > > > > > 48/62 Test #48: xmlsocketappendertestcase .............. Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 49: socketservertestcase
> > > > > > 49/62 Test #49: socketservertestcase ...................***Failed
> > > > 13.20
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 50: patternparsertestcase
> > > > > > 50/62 Test #50: patternparsertestcase .................. Passed
> > > > 0.09
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 51: filenamepatterntestcase
> > > > > > 51/62 Test #51: filenamepatterntestcase ................ Passed
> > > > 0.08
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 52: filterbasedrollingtest
> > > > > > 52/62 Test #52: filterbasedrollingtest ................. Passed
> > > > 0.10
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 53: manualrollingtest
> > > > > > 53/62 Test #53: manualrollingtest ...................... Passed
> > > > 0.09
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 54: obsoletedailyrollingfileappendertest
> > > > > > 54/62 Test #54: obsoletedailyrollingfileappendertest ... Passed
> > > > 5.19
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 55: obsoleterollingfileappendertest
> > > > > > 55/62 Test #55: obsoleterollingfileappendertest ........ Passed
> > > > 5.20
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 56: sizebasedrollingtest
> > > > > > 56/62 Test #56: sizebasedrollingtest ................... Passed
> > > > 0.14
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 57: timebasedrollingtest
> > > > > > 57/62 Test #57: timebasedrollingtest ................... Passed
> > > > 27.70
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 58: spitestcase
> > > > > > 58/62 Test #58: spitestcase ............................ Passed
> > > > 0.09
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 59: errorhandlertestcase
> > > > > > 59/62 Test #59: errorhandlertestcase ................... Passed
> > > > 0.09
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 60: levelmatchfiltertestcase
> > > > > > 60/62 Test #60: levelmatchfiltertestcase ............... Passed
> > > > 0.09
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 61: levelrangefiltertestcase
> > > > > > 61/62 Test #61: levelrangefiltertestcase ............... Passed
> > > > 0.09
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > > Start 62: xmltests
> > > > > > 62/62 Test #62: xmltests ............................... Passed
> > > > 0.14
> > > > > > sec
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 98% tests passed, 1 tests failed out of 62
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Total Test time (real) = 87.22 sec
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The following tests FAILED:
> > > > > > 49 - socketservertestcase (Failed)
> > > > > > Errors while running CTest
> > > > > > Output from these tests are in:
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > /Users/bkirnum/Documents/GitHub/logging-log4cxx/build/Testing/Temporary/LastTest.log
> > > > > > Use "--rerun-failed --output-on-failure" to re-run the failed cases
> > > > > > verbosely.
> > > > > > make: *** [test] Error 8
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 12:35 PM Robert Middleton <
> > > > rmiddle...@apache.org>
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Bob,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I don't use MacOS, so I don't know why that would happen. Builds
> > on
> > > > > >> MacOS through github actions are ok(but that is using 10.15).
> > > > > >> Assuming that your stack trace is correct, it's complaining about
> > line
> > > > > >> 159 in class.cpp, which is just 'return true'.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Are you able to run the unit tests at all?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> -Robert Middleton
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 11:49 AM Bob Kirnum <bkir...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Running application dynamically linked with log4cxx started
> > crashing
> > > > > >> after
> > > > > >>> upgrading MacOs to Monterey. I tried building a debug version
> > from
> > > > > >> source
> > > > > >>> but get the same error. Back trace shown below. Looks like
> > > > something is
> > > > > >>> missing in the environment but there are no cmake or build
> > errors.
> > > > Any
> > > > > >>> suggestions? I'd rather not have to downgrade back to Big Sur
> > as it
> > > > > >> would
> > > > > >>> require erasing my MacBook.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> (lldb) bt
> > > > > >>> * thread #1, stop reason = signal SIGSTOP
> > > > > >>> * frame #0: 0x0000000000000000
> > > > > >>> frame #1: 0x0000000113f3bd4d
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> > liblog4cxx.12.dylib`log4cxx::helpers::Class::registerClass(newClass=0x00000001140db358)
> > > > > >>> at class.cpp:159:2
> > > > > >>> frame #2: 0x0000000113f4034b
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> > liblog4cxx.12.dylib`log4cxx::helpers::ClassRegistration::ClassRegistration(this=0x00000001140db368,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> > accessor=(liblog4cxx.12.dylib`log4cxx::pattern::ClassNamePatternConverter::getStaticClass()
> > > > > >>> at classnamepatternconverter.cpp:32))()) at
> > > > classregistration.cpp:26:2
> > > > > >>> frame #3: 0x0000000113f4037d
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> > liblog4cxx.12.dylib`log4cxx::helpers::ClassRegistration::ClassRegistration(this=0x00000001140db368,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> > accessor=(liblog4cxx.12.dylib`log4cxx::pattern::ClassNamePatternConverter::getStaticClass()
> > > > > >>> at classnamepatternconverter.cpp:32))()) at
> > > > classregistration.cpp:25:1
> > > > > >>> frame #4: 0x0000000113f3e83d
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> > liblog4cxx.12.dylib`log4cxx::pattern::ClassNamePatternConverter::registerClass()
> > > > > >>> at classnamepatternconverter.cpp:32:1
> > > > > >>> frame #5: 0x0000000113f40309
> > > > > >>> liblog4cxx.12.dylib`::__cxx_global_var_init() at
> > > > > >>> classnamepatternconverter.cpp:32:1
> > > > > >>> frame #6: 0x0000000113f40329
> > > > > >>> liblog4cxx.12.dylib`_GLOBAL__sub_I_classnamepatternconverter.cpp
> > at
> > > > > >>> classnamepatternconverter.cpp:0
> > > > > >>> frame #7: 0x000000011e9e2b49 dyld`invocation function for
> > block in
> > > > > >>> dyld4::Loader::findAndRunAllInitializers(dyld4::RuntimeState&)
> > const
> > > > +
> > > > > >> 182
> > > > > >>> frame #8: 0x000000011ea0929b dyld`invocation function for
> > block in
> > > > > >>> dyld3::MachOAnalyzer::forEachInitializer(Diagnostics&,
> > > > > >>> dyld3::MachOAnalyzer::VMAddrConverter const&, void (unsigned int)
> > > > > >>> block_pointer, void const*) const + 242
> > > > > >>> frame #9: 0x000000011ea00893 dyld`invocation function for
> > block in
> > > > > >>> dyld3::MachOFile::forEachSection(void
> > (dyld3::MachOFile::SectionInfo
> > > > > >>> const&, bool, bool&) block_pointer) const + 566
> > > > > >>> frame #10: 0x000000011e9cfd91
> > > > > >>> dyld`dyld3::MachOFile::forEachLoadCommand(Diagnostics&, void
> > > > > >> (load_command
> > > > > >>> const*, bool&) block_pointer) const + 129
> > > > > >>> frame #11: 0x000000011ea0061b
> > > > > >>> dyld`dyld3::MachOFile::forEachSection(void
> > > > (dyld3::MachOFile::SectionInfo
> > > > > >>> const&, bool, bool&) block_pointer) const + 179
> > > > > >>> frame #12: 0x000000011ea08df2
> > > > > >>> dyld`dyld3::MachOAnalyzer::forEachInitializer(Diagnostics&,
> > > > > >>> dyld3::MachOAnalyzer::VMAddrConverter const&, void (unsigned int)
> > > > > >>> block_pointer, void const*) const + 466
> > > > > >>> frame #13: 0x000000011e9e2a7c
> > > > > >>>
> > dyld`dyld4::Loader::findAndRunAllInitializers(dyld4::RuntimeState&)
> > > > > >> const +
> > > > > >>> 144
> > > > > >>> frame #14: 0x000000011e9e2c08
> > > > > >>> dyld`dyld4::Loader::runInitializersBottomUp(dyld4::RuntimeState&,
> > > > > >>> dyld3::Array<dyld4::Loader const*>&) const + 178
> > > > > >>> frame #15: 0x000000011e9e2beb
> > > > > >>> dyld`dyld4::Loader::runInitializersBottomUp(dyld4::RuntimeState&,
> > > > > >>> dyld3::Array<dyld4::Loader const*>&) const + 149
> > > > > >>> frame #16: 0x000000011e9e2cac
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> > dyld`dyld4::Loader::runInitializersBottomUpPlusUpwardLinks(dyld4::RuntimeState&)
> > > > > >>> const + 108
> > > > > >>> frame #17: 0x000000011e9f632e
> > > > > >>> dyld`dyld4::APIs::runAllInitializersForMain() + 222
> > > > > >>> frame #18: 0x000000011e9d4358
> > dyld`dyld4::prepare(dyld4::APIs&,
> > > > > >>> dyld3::MachOAnalyzer const*) + 3438
> > > > > >>> frame #19: 0x000000011e9d34b4 dyld`start + 388
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> >
