Bug#205328: libc6: mathematica segfaults, too
Dear Meik, Thank you very much for the Mathematica workaround! It worked fine for me, after I had located the package libc6_2.3.1-16_i386.deb at http://ftp.pop-ce.rnp.br/pub/linux/debian/pool/main/g/glibc/ since the apt-get command gave me the new libc6-2.3.2; I just wondered whether there is a more natural place to look for the old package? Best regards, Florian Wagener -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reopening #218561 (libc6 relocation error)?
Hi glibc maintainers! I'm tempted to reopen this bug because it still breaks software even without using 'extern int errno'. I received a grave bug #219103 against epstool 3.02-3 yesterday, epstool failed with the current glibc because of this errno relocation issue. But grepping the source tree shows that everything is in order: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian/epstool-3.02$ grep -r errno . ./src/epstool.c:#include errno.h ./src/epstool.c:fprintf(stderr, Failed to fork, error=%d\n, errno); ./src/epstool.c:fprintf(stderr, Failed to open stdin/out/err, error=%d\n, errno); ./src/epstool.c:fprintf(stderr, Failed to execute ghostscript, error=%d\n, errno); So epstool.c is the _only_ source file requiring and using errno and it properly includes errno.h. I just found out that it works again if I include errno.h in the module clfile.c. That is very odd! IMHO include files should only be required if I actually use something from them. Otherwise fixing such bugs degenerates to randomly trying to include various files until the program works, which is certainly not the most desirable method of programming. If you want to try this yourself, then please download 3.02-3 (in testing), not the current unstable 3.02-4 (this solves the problem by disabling 64-bit file access, it does not use clfile.c; this was the only solution I found yesterday). Are there any satisfying arguments why the inclusion of errno.h in modules not needing it is really necessary? If so, is there any guarantee that this will not hold for other include files in the future? TIA and have a nice day! Martin -- Martin Pitt home: www.piware.de eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Reopening #218561 (libc6 relocation error)?
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 11:56:57AM +, Colin Watson wrote: On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 12:22:26PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian/epstool-3.02$ grep -r errno . ./src/epstool.c:#include errno.h ./src/epstool.c:fprintf(stderr, Failed to fork, error=%d\n, errno); ./src/epstool.c:fprintf(stderr, Failed to open stdin/out/err, error=%d\n, errno); ./src/epstool.c:fprintf(stderr, Failed to execute ghostscript, error=%d\n, errno); So epstool.c is the _only_ source file requiring and using errno and it properly includes errno.h. I just found out that it works again if I include errno.h in the module clfile.c. When I run 'gcc -E clfile.c' I see that /usr/include/linux/unistd.h says 'extern int errno;' (for _llseek(), I think). This seems like the real bug, doesn't it? Oh yes, also, clfile.c includes linux/unistd.h. You're not supposed to do this from userspace. Don't include kernel headers from userspace and you won't be vulnerable to this kind of problem. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#219271: libc6 - statvfs broken
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.2.ds1-9
Tags: sid
Hi,
The .ds1 versions of libc6 broke something, presumably in statvfs().
I have a remote (stable, 2.4.something) system with an unstable chroot on
it. Inside that chroot only a nfs share is mounted, nothing else. Up to
last week all worked fine; however since last time I updated the chroot
libc6 got upgraded to .ds1-8. When I tried updating the chroot again today
apt-get hung where it should prompt me to continue (i.e., after listing
what it was about to do).
Then I unmounted the nfs share, but to no effect - apt-get still hung.
Nothing was mounted (inside the chroot) anymore at that point.
I fiddled around a bit, with little success, until I mounted /proc to be
able to run ps without having to drop out of the chroot. When I stupidly
ran apt-get next, it suddenly worked. Unmounted /proc, hung again.
I ran strace and ltrace on an apt-get invocation next. The strace output
shows that apt-get opens /etc/mtab, then gets into an infinite loop:
...
write(1, Need to get 8671kB/9020kB of arc..., 39) = 39
write(1, After unpacking 26.0MB of additi..., 62) = 62
statfs(/var/cache/apt/archives/, {f_type=EXT2_SUPER_MAGIC, f_bsize=4096,
f_blocks=9376915, f_bfree=3701352, f_bavail=3225026, f_files=4767744, f_ffree=4227550,
f_fsid={0, 0}, f_namelen=255, f_frsize=0}) = 0
stat64(/var/cache/apt/archives/, {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0755, st_size=135168, ...}) = 0
open(/proc/mounts, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
open(/etc/mtab, O_RDONLY) = 15
fstat64(15, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=0, ...}) = 0
old_mmap(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) =
0x40019000
read(15, , 4096) = 0
_llseek(15, 0, [0], SEEK_SET) = 0
read(15, , 4096) = 0
_llseek(15, 0, [0], SEEK_SET) = 0
read(15, , 4096) = 0
_llseek(15, 0, [0], SEEK_SET) = 0
(repeated several thousand times)
read(15, , 4096) = 0
_llseek(15, 0, [0], SEEK_SET) = 0
--- SIGINT (Interrupt) @ 0 (0) ---
+++ killed by SIGINT +++
Note that opening /proc/mounts is tried before mtab, which is supposedly
why things work when /proc is mounted (altough it's curious that it does
not loop then).
Note also that currently mtab is empty, but it hardly matters. After
mounting the nfs share again, it reads a number of bytes, stat64()s the
nfs mount point as it does with /var/cache/apt/archives/ now, does another
read() with 0 result as happens above too, and then there's the _llseek()
and things start all over again. (Would the _llseek() be the culprit?)
Running from within ltrace rather than strace gives this as final output:
...
dcgettext(0, 0x08060e60, 5, 0x0806989c, 0xbfffef40)=
0x08060e60
_Z8ioprintfRSoPKcz(0x08065c20, 0x08060e60, 0x0806989c, 0x0806989c, 0xbfffef40) =
0x08065c20
_ZNSs4_Rep10_M_destroyERKSaIcE(0x08069890, 0xb460, 0x0806989c, 0x0806989c,
0xbfffef40) = 0
_Z12_GetErrorObjv(0x08069890, 0xb460, 0x0806989c, 0x0806989c, 0xbfffef40) =
0x08068e40
_ZNK13Configuration5FindBEPKcb(0x080660e0, 0x0805fc30, 0, 0x0806989c, 0xbfffef40) = 0
_ZNK13Configuration5FindBEPKcb(0x080660e0, 0x0805fc4b, 1, 0x0806989c, 0xbfffef40) = 1
_ZNK13Configuration7FindDirEPKcS1_(0xb440, 0x080660e0, 0x0805fd03, 0, 0xbfffef40)
= 0xb440
statvfs(0x08069484, 0xbfffef30, 0x0805fd03, 0, 0xbfffef40 unfinished ...
--- SIGINT (Interrupt) ---
+++ killed by SIGINT +++
Hence my assumption to blame statvfs().
I downgraded to 2.3.2-9 from snapshot.debian.net; this version worked both
with and without /proc being mounted.
Regards,
Filip
--
Evil Overlord Quote of the Day:
150.I will provide funding and research to develop tactical and strategic
weapons covering a full range of needs so my choices are not limited to
hand to hand combat with swords and blow up the planet.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#219271: libc6 - statvfs broken
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 01:48:37PM +0100, Filip Van Raemdonck wrote: The .ds1 versions of libc6 broke something, presumably in statvfs(). Upstream CVS has the following: 2003-10-26 Ulrich Drepper [EMAIL PROTECTED] * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/internal_statvfs.c (__internal_statvfs): Avoid infinite loops in case the mounts file is hosed. I'll apply to the -10 upload going in today. Thanks! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#219271: libc6 - statvfs broken
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 05:20:48AM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote: On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 01:48:37PM +0100, Filip Van Raemdonck wrote: The .ds1 versions of libc6 broke something, presumably in statvfs(). Upstream CVS has the following: 2003-10-26 Ulrich Drepper [EMAIL PROTECTED] * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/internal_statvfs.c (__internal_statvfs): Avoid infinite loops in case the mounts file is hosed. I'll apply to the -10 upload going in today. Thanks! Yes, thanks. I didn't pull this in because I didn't realize that a missing mounts file could trigger it. It came from a problem where I had somehow _copied_ an old version of /proc into one of my chroots, with humorous results on procps. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#219205: libc6: Need update to libpthread locking code
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 06:46:36PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote: On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 02:21:57AM +, James Troup wrote: Mike Fedyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.2.ds1-9 Severity: normal The change mentioned at [1]doesn't seem to have made it into the debian libc6 package. It was only committed today... :-P Mainly I'd just like to know when that particular change makes it into the debian package, and it would be good IMHO for it to be in the changelog. Sorry for any inconvenience. We will not be updating from CVS again before Sarge releases. I am hesitant to pick up locking changes. Let's see what happens with the rest of libc6's stability first. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#219176: libc6.1: Fails to install on ia64 because of libc in ia32-libs
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 01:53:30PM -0700, Eric Schwartz wrote: Package: libc6.1 Version: 2.3.2-9 Severity: grave Tags: sid I tried a dist-upgrade today: The following packages have unmet dependencies: libc6.1-dev: Depends: libc6.1 (= 2.3.2.ds1-9) but 2.3.2-9 is installed locales: Depends: glibc-2.3.2.ds1-8 but it is not installable So I 'apt-get -f install' to fix this problem: Preparing to replace libc6.1 2.3.2-9 (using .../libc6.1_2.3.2.ds1-9_ia64.deb) ... These libraries were found in /emul/ia32-linux/lib: libc.so.6 libdl.so.2 libm.so.6 libpthread.so.0 librt.so.1 Another copy of the C library was found via /etc/ld.so.conf. It is not safe to upgrade the C library in this situation; please remove the directory from /etc/ld.so.conf and try again. dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6.1_2.3.2.ds1-9_ia64.deb (--unpack): subprocess pre-installation script returned error exit status 1 Errors were encountered while processing: /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6.1_2.3.2.ds1-9_ia64.deb E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) The libraries libc6.1 is complaining about are ia32 emulation libraries from ia32-libs and libc6.1 should (AFAIK) just ignore them and continue on its merry way. I filed this as 'grave' because the current version of libc6.1 is uninstallable on ia64. Well, with that package installed. I guess so. You shouldn't need to have these directories in /etc/ld.so.conf for emulation to work but it's easy enough to ignore them. Fixed for -10. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cvs commit to glibc-package/debian by dan
Repository: glibc-package/debian who:dan time: Wed Nov 5 07:11:29 MST 2003 Log Message: - debian/debhelper.in/libc.preinst: Ignore ia32-libs also (Closes: #219176). - debian/control.in/main: Build depend on fixed linux-kernel-headers to get ia64 module syscalls (Closes: #218645). Files: changed:changelog control -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cvs commit to glibc-package/debian/control.in by dan
Repository: glibc-package/debian/control.in who:dan time: Wed Nov 5 07:11:29 MST 2003 Log Message: - debian/debhelper.in/libc.preinst: Ignore ia32-libs also (Closes: #219176). - debian/control.in/main: Build depend on fixed linux-kernel-headers to get ia64 module syscalls (Closes: #218645). Files: changed:main -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cvs commit to glibc-package/debian/debhelper.in by dan
Repository: glibc-package/debian/debhelper.in who:dan time: Wed Nov 5 07:11:29 MST 2003 Log Message: - debian/debhelper.in/libc.preinst: Ignore ia32-libs also (Closes: #219176). - debian/control.in/main: Build depend on fixed linux-kernel-headers to get ia64 module syscalls (Closes: #218645). Files: changed:libc.preinst -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#204789: [Gcl-devel] Re: ia64 function descriptors and unexec
Camm Maguire [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When I first read this, I was more confused by the meaning of the term 'local' and what I've been seeing. Which is understandable, because I was confused, too. What you are saying is correct. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL PROTECTED] SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 And now for something completely different. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cvs commit to linux-kernel-headers/debian by dan
Repository: linux-kernel-headers/debian who:dan time: Wed Nov 5 08:03:31 MST 2003 Log Message: - debian/linux-kernel-headers.preinst: Check for asm-generic symlink (Closes: #218516). - debian/patches/linux-unistd-errno.patch: Don't say extern int errno in userspace. - debian/patches/linux-radix-tree.patch: Disable this header outside __KERNEL__ (Closes: #219175). Files: changed:changelog linux-kernel-headers.preinst -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cvs commit to linux-kernel-headers/debian/patches by dan
Repository: linux-kernel-headers/debian/patches who:dan time: Wed Nov 5 08:03:31 MST 2003 Log Message: - debian/linux-kernel-headers.preinst: Check for asm-generic symlink (Closes: #218516). - debian/patches/linux-unistd-errno.patch: Don't say extern int errno in userspace. - debian/patches/linux-radix-tree.patch: Disable this header outside __KERNEL__ (Closes: #219175). Files: added: linux-radix-tree.patch linux-unistd-errno.patch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cvs commit to glibc-package/debian/patches by jbailey
Repository: glibc-package/debian/patches who:jbailey time: Wed Nov 5 08:55:45 MST 2003 Log Message: - debian/patches/90_glibc232-statvfs.dpatch: Don't get confused on bad mtab. (Closes: #219271) - debian/patches/90_glibc232-timezones.dpatch: Update timezone information. Files: changed:00list added: 90_glibc232-statvfs.dpatch 90_glibc232-timezones.dpatch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cvs commit to glibc-package/debian by jbailey
Repository: glibc-package/debian who:jbailey time: Wed Nov 5 08:55:45 MST 2003 Log Message: - debian/patches/90_glibc232-statvfs.dpatch: Don't get confused on bad mtab. (Closes: #219271) - debian/patches/90_glibc232-timezones.dpatch: Update timezone information. Files: changed:changelog -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8_i386.changes ACCEPTED
Accepted: linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8.diff.gz to pool/main/l/linux-kernel-headers/linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8.diff.gz linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8.dsc to pool/main/l/linux-kernel-headers/linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8.dsc linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8_i386.deb to pool/main/l/linux-kernel-headers/linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8_i386.deb Announcing to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Closing bugs: 218516 219175 Thank you for your contribution to Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#218516: linux-kernel-headers: Check for symbolic link before installing
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 05:52:20PM +0100, Eric Valette wrote: Eric Valette wrote: Because Sarge supports NPTL when using 2.6 kernels, and that requires 2.6 headers to be useful. A number of other applications can take advantage of 2.6 features there now. NPTL is fine mostly for servers. But I guess a number of user mode driver for average people will also probably break right now because of API inconsistencies between 2.4 and 2.6 (raw 1394 or USB are expected). I start wondering if a 2.4 GLIBC and a 2.6 GLIBC should be envisaged? Ooops. See thread about NPTL performances problem compared to linuxthread due to bad locking locking strategy. http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0311.0/0468.html NB: apparently CVS NPTL is fixed but waht about debian libc :-) Not due to bad locking strategy, due to a _typo_ essentially. We're going to fix performance issues when we have a freaking C library that _works_ again, OK? -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#218516: linux-kernel-headers: Check for symbolic link before installing
Eric Valette wrote: Because Sarge supports NPTL when using 2.6 kernels, and that requires 2.6 headers to be useful. A number of other applications can take advantage of 2.6 features there now. NPTL is fine mostly for servers. But I guess a number of user mode driver for average people will also probably break right now because of API inconsistencies between 2.4 and 2.6 (raw 1394 or USB are expected). I start wondering if a 2.4 GLIBC and a 2.6 GLIBC should be envisaged? Ooops. See thread about NPTL performances problem compared to linuxthread due to bad locking locking strategy. http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0311.0/0468.html NB: apparently CVS NPTL is fixed but waht about debian libc :-) -- __ / ` Eric Valette /-- __ o _. 6 rue Paul Le Flem (___, / (_(_(__ 35740 Pace Tel: +33 (0)2 99 85 26 76 Fax: +33 (0)2 99 85 26 76 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#219175: marked as done (linux-kernel-headers: fs.h doesn't compile when included from userspace)
Your message dated Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:32:23 -0500 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#219175: fixed in linux-kernel-headers 2.5.999-test7-bk-8 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 4 Nov 2003 20:49:08 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 04 14:49:07 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from 178-207.speede.golden.net (pisces.woot.net) [216.75.178.207] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AH86t-0007ta-00; Tue, 04 Nov 2003 14:49:07 -0600 Received: by pisces.woot.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 78622FE945; Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:48:42 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Joe Drew [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: linux-kernel-headers: fs.h doesn't compile when included from userspace X-Mailer: reportbug 2.36 Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 15:48:42 -0500 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_70,HAS_PACKAGE version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_03 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_03 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) Package: linux-kernel-headers Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-6 Severity: normal Regardless of whether one should include kernel headers in userspace, this shouldn't be the case. In file included from /usr/include/linux/fs.h:16, from gfloppy.c:40: /usr/include/linux/list.h:576:2: warning: #warning don't include kernel headers in userspace In file included from /usr/include/linux/fs.h:20, from gfloppy.c:40: /usr/include/linux/radix-tree.h: In function `radix_tree_preload_end': /usr/include/linux/radix-tree.h:54: error: invalid type argument of `-' /usr/include/linux/radix-tree.h:54: error: `TIF_NEED_RESCHED' undeclared (first use in this function) /usr/include/linux/radix-tree.h:54: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once /usr/include/linux/radix-tree.h:54: error: for each function it appears in.) -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux pisces 2.4.22 #4 Fri Sep 5 21:44:11 EDT 2003 i686 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US -- no debconf information --- Received: (at 219175-close) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Nov 2003 16:38:41 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 05 10:38:40 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHQg2-0006Sv-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 10:38:38 -0600 Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHQZz-0006yN-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:32:23 -0500 From: Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.42 $ Subject: Bug#219175: fixed in linux-kernel-headers 2.5.999-test7-bk-8 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Archive Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:32:23 -0500 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Source: linux-kernel-headers Source-Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-8 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of linux-kernel-headers, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8.diff.gz to pool/main/l/linux-kernel-headers/linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8.diff.gz linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8.dsc to pool/main/l/linux-kernel-headers/linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8.dsc linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8_i386.deb to pool/main/l/linux-kernel-headers/linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8_i386.deb A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] (supplier of updated linux-kernel-headers package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 09:32:07 -0500 Source:
Bug#218516: marked as done (linux-kernel-headers: Check for symbolic link before installing)
Your message dated Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:32:22 -0500 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#218516: fixed in linux-kernel-headers 2.5.999-test7-bk-8 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Oct 2003 21:19:05 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 31 15:18:40 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from postfix4-2.free.fr [213.228.0.176] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AFgfF-0002zS-00; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:18:37 -0600 Received: from localhost (unknown [81.56.219.194]) by postfix4-2.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 234F3C2F4; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:18:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from valette by localhost with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1AFgil-0005dk-00; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:22:15 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Eric Valette [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: linux-kernel-headers: Check for symbolic link before installing Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: reportbug 2.36 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:22:14 +0100 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Eric Valette [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_90,HAS_PACKAGE version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_10_31 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_10_31 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) Package: linux-kernel-headers Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-5 Severity: normal To compile some apps, I add to use recent kernel headers and thus linked by hand asm,scsi,linux using symbolic links directly to the real linux includes. Installing the linux-kernel-headers packages screwed my real kernel includes. As I know many people do this to get accurate API/constant (even if its arguably a mistake). I think testing for symblic link and removing them is easy in preinst and could save a lot of problems... -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux tri-yann 2.4.23-pre9 #10 Thu Oct 30 17:24:08 CET 2003 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=en_IE -- no debconf information --- Received: (at 218516-close) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Nov 2003 16:50:15 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 05 10:50:14 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHQfS-0006J7-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 10:38:02 -0600 Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHQZy-0006yL-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:32:22 -0500 From: Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.42 $ Subject: Bug#218516: fixed in linux-kernel-headers 2.5.999-test7-bk-8 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Archive Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:32:22 -0500 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Source: linux-kernel-headers Source-Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-8 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of linux-kernel-headers, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8.diff.gz to pool/main/l/linux-kernel-headers/linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8.diff.gz linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8.dsc to pool/main/l/linux-kernel-headers/linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8.dsc linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8_i386.deb to pool/main/l/linux-kernel-headers/linux-kernel-headers_2.5.999-test7-bk-8_i386.deb A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] (supplier of updated linux-kernel-headers package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 09:32:07 -0500 Source: linux-kernel-headers Binary: linux-kernel-headers Architecture: source i386 Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-8 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low
Bug#205099: Please check these bugs with the latest glibc
GOTO Masanori [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At Mon, 3 Nov 2003 14:30:36 -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: On Nov 3, 2003, at 10:16, GOTO Masanori wrote: Bug#205099, #205234, and #211621 have sit as Grave bug for 2 or 3 months - but at last any developers can't reproduce this problem. FYI, I'm only in the bug because I re-opened it when someone else said the problem still existed. Hmm... so could you confirm that this bug is already fixed? These 3 bugs are marked as grave, so we have to resolve ASAP. And the trouble is debian-glibc maintainers can't reproduce the reoccurrence of these bugs. I would like to close these bugs. If you and someone think there still exist bugs, could you tell us? If not, could I close these bugs? I was able to reproduce the lwres related RPC problem until a few days ago. It seems to be gone now, probably got fixed by the recent glibc updates. Juergen -- Juergen Kreileder, Blackdown Java-Linux Team http://www.blackdown.org/java-linux/java2-status/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.changes ACCEPTED
Accepted: glibc-doc_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc-doc_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.diff.gz to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.diff.gz glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.dsc to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.dsc libc-udeb_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.udeb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc-udeb_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.udeb libc6.1-dbg_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1-dbg_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb libc6.1-dev_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1-dev_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb libc6.1-pic_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1-pic_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb libc6.1-prof_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1-prof_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb libc6.1_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb locales_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/locales_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb nscd_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/nscd_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb Announcing to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Closing bugs: 218449 218524 218595 218642 218645 219025 219176 219271 Thank you for your contribution to Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#205099: Please check these bugs with the latest glibc
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 06:56:11PM +0100, Juergen Kreileder wrote: Hmm... so could you confirm that this bug is already fixed? These 3 bugs are marked as grave, so we have to resolve ASAP. And the trouble is debian-glibc maintainers can't reproduce the reoccurrence of these bugs. I would like to close these bugs. If you and someone think there still exist bugs, could you tell us? If not, could I close these bugs? I was able to reproduce the lwres related RPC problem until a few days ago. It seems to be gone now, probably got fixed by the recent glibc updates. Lovely, closing 211621 then. Thanks! Tks, Jeff Bailey -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#218595: marked as done (glibc: FTBFS with make 3.79.1-14)
Your message dated Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:51 -0500 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#218595: fixed in glibc 2.3.2.ds1-10 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 1 Nov 2003 14:41:04 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Nov 01 08:41:00 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from smtp3.pp.htv.fi [213.243.153.173] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AFwvt-0006Eb-00; Sat, 01 Nov 2003 08:40:54 -0600 Received: from guybrush (cs141234.pp.htv.fi [213.243.141.234]) by smtp3.pp.htv.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1A3227B0C4; Sat, 1 Nov 2003 16:40:52 +0200 (EET) Received: from lechuck ([192.168.0.2]) by guybrush with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AFwve-0007nj-00; Sat, 01 Nov 2003 16:40:38 +0200 Received: from mokautto by lechuck with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AFwwF-0005kZ-00; Sat, 01 Nov 2003 16:41:15 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Mikko Kautto [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: glibc: FTBFS with make 3.79.1-14 X-Mailer: reportbug 2.36 Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 16:41:15 +0200 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Mikko Kautto [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_01,HAS_PACKAGE version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_1 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) Package: glibc Severity: minor Tags: sid When trying to compile glibc-2.3.2.ds1-8 with make 3.79.1-14 (that is a build-dependency for glibc-2.3.2.ds1-8), the compilation dies out with the following error: mv -f /home/mokautto/source/glibc-2.3.2.ds1/stamp-dir/patch-stampT /home/mokautto/source/glibc-2.3.2.ds1/stamp-dir/patch-stamp rm -rf debian/include mkdir debian/include ln -s /usr/include/linux debian/include ln -s /usr/include/asm-generic debian/include ln -s /usr/include/asm debian/include # To make configure happy if libc6-dev is not installed. touch debian/include/assert.h touch /home/mokautto/source/glibc-2.3.2.ds1/stamp-dir/mkincludedir Making builddir for libc test -d build-tree/i386-libc || mkdir build-tree/i386-libc touch /home/mokautto/source/glibc-2.3.2.ds1/stamp-dir/mkbuilddir_libc debian/rules.d/build.mk:15: *** Recursive variable `xx' references itself (eventually). Stop. The following is from the changelog of make 3.80-1: make (3.80-1) unstable; urgency=low * The variable invoked by $(call ...) can now be recursive: unlike other variables it can reference itself and this will not produce an error when it is used as the first argument to $(call ...) (but only then). glibc 2.3.2.ds1-8 compiles fine with make 3.80-4 -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux lechuck 2.4.22-1-k7 #5 Sat Oct 4 14:11:12 EST 2003 i686 Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Received: (at 218595-close) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Nov 2003 18:24:40 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 05 12:24:39 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHSKd-00079O-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:24:39 -0600 Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHSF1-sW-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:51 -0500 From: Jeff Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.42 $ Subject: Bug#218595: fixed in glibc 2.3.2.ds1-10 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Archive Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:51 -0500 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Source: glibc Source-Version: 2.3.2.ds1-10 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of glibc, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: glibc-doc_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc-doc_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.diff.gz to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.diff.gz glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.dsc to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.dsc libc-udeb_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.udeb to
Bug#219025: marked as done (libc6 upgrade broke ldconfig)
Your message dated Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:51 -0500 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#219025: fixed in glibc 2.3.2.ds1-10 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 3 Nov 2003 21:59:41 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 03 15:59:40 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from mta01.btfusion.com [62.172.195.11] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AGmjc-jm-00; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 15:59:40 -0600 Received: from [81.130.70.180] (helo=INT) by mta01.btfusion.com with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AGmjb-Fm-I5 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 21:59:39 + Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: debbugreport [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: libc6 upgrade broke ldconfig Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 21:59:47 - MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_03 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_03 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.2.ds1-9 ran an apt-get dist-upgrade which attempted to update about 30 packages and install 1 new. Failed on libc6 with: /var/lib/dpkg/info/libc6.postinst: line 360: 9763 Illegal instruction ldconfig dpkg: error processing libc6 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 132 Errors were encountered while processing: libc6 E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) ldconfig -v or ldconfig --help or ldconfig anything just produces an illegal instruction. Unable to remove, install, dpkg or dselect anything now. dpkg: error processing libc6 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 132 dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of locales: locales depends on glibc-2.3.2.ds1-9; however: Package glibc-2.3.2.ds1-9 is not installed. Package libc6 which provides glibc-2.3.2.ds1-9 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing locales (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of ldso: ldso depends on libc6 (= 2.1.94); however: Package libc6 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing ldso (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libc6 locales ldso -- Linux 2.2.20-idepci #1 Sat Apr 20 12:45:19 EST 2002 i686 GNU/Linux lrwxrwxrwx1 root root 13 Nov 3 18:15 /lib/libc.so.6 - libc-2.3.2.so sources list: deb ftp://security.debian.org/debian-security stable/updates main contrib non-free deb ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free deb ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.536 / Virus Database: 331 - Release Date: 03/11/2003 --- Received: (at 219025-close) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Nov 2003 18:24:38 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 05 12:24:38 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHSKc-00078P-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:24:38 -0600 Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHSF1-sc-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:51 -0500 From: Jeff Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.42 $ Subject: Bug#219025: fixed in glibc 2.3.2.ds1-10 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Archive Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:51 -0500 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Source: glibc Source-Version: 2.3.2.ds1-10 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of glibc, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: glibc-doc_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc-doc_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.diff.gz to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.diff.gz glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.dsc to
Bug#205234: marked as done (libc6: vsyslog() call hangs su and login)
Your message dated Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:32:44 -0800 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#205099: Please check these bugs with the latest glibc has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Aug 2003 15:04:14 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 13 10:02:27 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from sea2-f20.sea2.hotmail.com (hotmail.com) [207.68.165.20] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 19mx8t-0004L5-00; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 10:02:27 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 08:02:26 -0700 Received: from 142.201.5.100 by sea2fd.sea2.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:02:26 GMT X-Originating-IP: [142.201.5.100] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Nikita Matantsev [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bcc: Subject: libc6: vsyslog() call hangs su and login Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 11:02:26 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Aug 2003 15:02:26.0802 (UTC) FILETIME=[E8B58D20:01C361AB] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_30,HAS_PACKAGE version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_07_20 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_07_20 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.2-2 After upgrading to this version of libc6 and rebooting, su or login do not work anymore. su hangs after prompting for password (or right away, if invoked as root), regardless of whether the '-' option is given. I am running Debian unstable; I tried this with at least 3 or 4 kernels. For kernels 2.2.25, 2.4.20, 2.4.21 I was able to successfully login using GDM; but su hung in all of them. When I tried booting with the 2.6.0 testing kernel in unstable, I got a chance to try text console login (X server wouldn't start due to its own issues) - I could not login through console at all - login hung as well. I also tried downgrading the login package, but that did not make any difference. I ran su using gdb and after it hung and I sent SIGINT to the process, the backtrace was as follows: #0 0x401e3b88 in __pthread_sigsuspend () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 #1 0x401e3999 in __pthread_wait_for_restart_signal () from /lib/libpthread.so.0#2 0x401e5159 in __pthread_alt_lock () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 #3 0x401e24e6 in pthread_mutex_lock () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 #4 0x4011dead in vsyslog () from /lib/libc.so.6 #5 0x40180289 in _log_err () from /lib/security/pam_unix.so #6 0x4017ead7 in pam_sm_open_session () from /lib/security/pam_unix.so #7 0x4004c9c8 in pam_fail_delay () from /lib/libpam.so.0 #8 0x4004cb18 in _pam_dispatch () from /lib/libpam.so.0 #9 0x4004e516 in pam_open_session () from /lib/libpam.so.0 #10 0x0804a780 in ?? () #11 0x080568c8 in ?? () Googling revealed that the pthread calls look like something to do with an unitialized mutex, but that's just my guessing. Downgrading libc6 to 2.3.1 fixed the problem. This bug seems similar to bug #205099 - that one also involved a syslog call and a hanging process. Cheers! Nick _ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail --- Received: (at 211621-done) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Nov 2003 18:33:22 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 05 12:33:11 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from marge.v3.ca [216.66.20.89] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHSSs-0008G4-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:33:10 -0600 Received: from marge.v3.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by marge.v3.ca (8.12.10/8.12.10/Debian-0) with ESMTP id hA5IWjda021849; Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:32:45 -0800 Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by marge.v3.ca (8.12.10/8.12.10/Debian-0) id hA5IWiWs021842; Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:32:44 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: marge.v3.ca: jbailey set sender to [EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:32:44 -0800 From: Jeff Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Juergen Kreileder [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: GOTO Masanori [EMAIL PROTECTED], Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#205099: Please check
Bug#218645: marked as done (glibc 2.3.2.ds1-8 on ia64, query_module() not implemented)
Your message dated Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:51 -0500 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#218645: fixed in glibc 2.3.2.ds1-10 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 1 Nov 2003 22:38:40 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Nov 01 16:38:39 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from cpc1-hem11-4-0-cust109.lutn.cable.ntl.com (thinkpad.home) [80.2.252.109] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AG4OF-0004nt-00; Sat, 01 Nov 2003 16:38:39 -0600 Received: by thinkpad.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DFBFC9E718; Sat, 1 Nov 2003 22:10:54 + (GMT) Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 22:10:54 + From: Richard Hirst [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: glibc 2.3.2.ds1-8 on ia64, query_module() not implemented Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_01,HAS_PACKAGE version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_1 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) package: glibc version: 2.3.2.ds1-8 query_module() is not implemented, which results in depmod failing with QM_MODULES: Function not implemented This is maybe because the syscall define is commented out in asm/unistd.h from linux-kernel-headers 2.5.999-test7-bk-5 In the 2.4.22 kernel source, that syscall is not commented. I was also unable to build modutils with this glibc and linux-kernel-headers installed: ../../../util/sys_oim.c:36: error: parse error before old_sys_init_module Trying to compile a simple program that calls query_module() gives: : warning: warning: query_module is not implemented and will always fail Richard --- Received: (at 218645-close) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Nov 2003 18:24:39 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 05 12:24:39 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHSKc-00078i-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:24:38 -0600 Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHSF1-sa-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:51 -0500 From: Jeff Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.42 $ Subject: Bug#218645: fixed in glibc 2.3.2.ds1-10 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Archive Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:51 -0500 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Source: glibc Source-Version: 2.3.2.ds1-10 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of glibc, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: glibc-doc_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc-doc_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.diff.gz to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.diff.gz glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.dsc to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.dsc libc-udeb_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.udeb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc-udeb_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.udeb libc6.1-dbg_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1-dbg_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb libc6.1-dev_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1-dev_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb libc6.1-pic_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1-pic_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb libc6.1-prof_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1-prof_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb libc6.1_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb locales_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/locales_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb nscd_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/nscd_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Jeff Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] (supplier of updated glibc package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:53:14 -0500 Source: glibc Binary: libc6.1-prof libc6-i686
Bug#219271: marked as done (libc6 - statvfs broken)
Your message dated Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:51 -0500
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#219271: fixed in glibc 2.3.2.ds1-10
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Nov 2003 12:49:05 +
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 05 06:48:39 2003
Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from slider.rack66.net [212.3.252.135]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1AHN5S-00051O-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 06:48:38 -0600
Received: by slider.rack66.net (Postfix, from userid 1026)
id D3A55F241; Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:48:37 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:48:37 +0100
From: Filip Van Raemdonck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: libc6 - statvfs broken
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0
tests=BAYES_30,DATING,HAS_PACKAGE
version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_03
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_03
(1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.2.ds1-9
Tags: sid
Hi,
The .ds1 versions of libc6 broke something, presumably in statvfs().
I have a remote (stable, 2.4.something) system with an unstable chroot on
it. Inside that chroot only a nfs share is mounted, nothing else. Up to
last week all worked fine; however since last time I updated the chroot
libc6 got upgraded to .ds1-8. When I tried updating the chroot again today
apt-get hung where it should prompt me to continue (i.e., after listing
what it was about to do).
Then I unmounted the nfs share, but to no effect - apt-get still hung.
Nothing was mounted (inside the chroot) anymore at that point.
I fiddled around a bit, with little success, until I mounted /proc to be
able to run ps without having to drop out of the chroot. When I stupidly
ran apt-get next, it suddenly worked. Unmounted /proc, hung again.
I ran strace and ltrace on an apt-get invocation next. The strace output
shows that apt-get opens /etc/mtab, then gets into an infinite loop:
...
write(1, Need to get 8671kB/9020kB of arc..., 39) = 39
write(1, After unpacking 26.0MB of additi..., 62) = 62
statfs(/var/cache/apt/archives/, {f_type=EXT2_SUPER_MAGIC, f_bsize=4096,
f_blocks=9376915, f_bfree=3701352, f_bavail=3225026, f_files=4767744, f_ffree=4227550,
f_fsid={0, 0}, f_namelen=255, f_frsize=0}) = 0
stat64(/var/cache/apt/archives/, {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0755, st_size=135168, ...}) = 0
open(/proc/mounts, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
open(/etc/mtab, O_RDONLY) = 15
fstat64(15, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=0, ...}) = 0
old_mmap(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) =
0x40019000
read(15, , 4096) = 0
_llseek(15, 0, [0], SEEK_SET) = 0
read(15, , 4096) = 0
_llseek(15, 0, [0], SEEK_SET) = 0
read(15, , 4096) = 0
_llseek(15, 0, [0], SEEK_SET) = 0
(repeated several thousand times)
read(15, , 4096) = 0
_llseek(15, 0, [0], SEEK_SET) = 0
--- SIGINT (Interrupt) @ 0 (0) ---
+++ killed by SIGINT +++
Note that opening /proc/mounts is tried before mtab, which is supposedly
why things work when /proc is mounted (altough it's curious that it does
not loop then).
Note also that currently mtab is empty, but it hardly matters. After
mounting the nfs share again, it reads a number of bytes, stat64()s the
nfs mount point as it does with /var/cache/apt/archives/ now, does another
read() with 0 result as happens above too, and then there's the _llseek()
and things start all over again. (Would the _llseek() be the culprit?)
Running from within ltrace rather than strace gives this as final output:
...
dcgettext(0, 0x08060e60, 5, 0x0806989c, 0xbfffef40)=
0x08060e60
_Z8ioprintfRSoPKcz(0x08065c20, 0x08060e60, 0x0806989c, 0x0806989c, 0xbfffef40) =
0x08065c20
_ZNSs4_Rep10_M_destroyERKSaIcE(0x08069890, 0xb460, 0x0806989c, 0x0806989c,
0xbfffef40) = 0
_Z12_GetErrorObjv(0x08069890, 0xb460, 0x0806989c, 0x0806989c, 0xbfffef40) =
0x08068e40
_ZNK13Configuration5FindBEPKcb(0x080660e0, 0x0805fc30, 0, 0x0806989c, 0xbfffef40) = 0
_ZNK13Configuration5FindBEPKcb(0x080660e0, 0x0805fc4b, 1, 0x0806989c, 0xbfffef40) = 1
Bug#218449: marked as done (libc6: refuses upgrade if libc5 or libc4 (a.out) installed)
Your message dated Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:50 -0500 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#218449: fixed in glibc 2.3.2.ds1-10 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Oct 2003 13:05:00 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 31 07:04:51 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from s2.org (kalahari.s2.org) [195.197.64.39] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AFYxO-0002bi-00; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 07:04:50 -0600 Received: from jpaana by kalahari.s2.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1AFYxI-00072Q-00; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:04:44 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Jarno Paananen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: libc6: refuses upgrade if libc5 or libc4 (a.out) installed X-Mailer: reportbug 2.36 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:04:44 +0200 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_10_28 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_10_28 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.2.ds1-8 Severity: important Tags: sid The package refuses to upgrade in preinst phase if it finds any libc, including libc4 (a.out) or libc5 libs. Is this intentional? -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux kalahari 2.4.22 #5 Mon Aug 25 15:06:06 EEST 2003 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C Versions of packages libc6 depends on: ii libdb1-compat 2.1.3-7The Berkeley database routines [gl -- no debconf information --- Received: (at 218449-close) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Nov 2003 18:24:41 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 05 12:24:41 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHSKe-00079t-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:24:40 -0600 Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHSF0-sS-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:50 -0500 From: Jeff Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.42 $ Subject: Bug#218449: fixed in glibc 2.3.2.ds1-10 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Archive Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:50 -0500 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Source: glibc Source-Version: 2.3.2.ds1-10 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of glibc, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: glibc-doc_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc-doc_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.diff.gz to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.diff.gz glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.dsc to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.2.ds1-10.dsc libc-udeb_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.udeb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc-udeb_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.udeb libc6.1-dbg_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1-dbg_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb libc6.1-dev_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1-dev_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb libc6.1-pic_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1-pic_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb libc6.1-prof_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1-prof_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb libc6.1_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6.1_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb locales_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/locales_2.3.2.ds1-10_all.deb nscd_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/nscd_2.3.2.ds1-10_ia64.deb A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Jeff Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] (supplier of updated glibc package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:53:14 -0500 Source: glibc Binary: libc6.1-prof libc6-i686 libc1 libc0.3-pic locales glibc-doc libc6-pic libc-udeb libc1-prof libc0.3 libc0.3-dbg libc6.1-dev libc1-pic
Bug#218642: marked as done (locales: Please update Dutch translation)
Your message dated Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:18:51 -0500 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#218642: fixed in glibc 2.3.2.ds1-10 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 1 Nov 2003 22:04:15 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Nov 01 16:04:14 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from smtp-106-saturday.noc.nerim.net (mallaury.noc.nerim.net) [62.4.17.106] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AG3qw-0007ef-00; Sat, 01 Nov 2003 16:04:14 -0600 Received: from localhost.localdomain (sinibar.net1.nerim.net [62.4.18.43]) by mallaury.noc.nerim.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4455462D3E; Sat, 1 Nov 2003 23:04:11 +0100 (CET) Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6933425018; Sat, 1 Nov 2003 22:05:26 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 22:05:26 +0100 From: Denis Barbier [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: locales: Please update Dutch translation Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=TB36FDmn/VVEgNH/ Content-Disposition: inline X-Reportbug-Version: 2.36 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_20,HAS_PACKAGE version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_1 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) --TB36FDmn/VVEgNH/ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Package: locales Version: 2.3.2.ds1-8 Severity: minor Tags: patch Hi, Bart Cornelis sent this updated Dutch translation of debconf templates to me directly instead of filing a bugreport, and my reply did not reach him, so I am filing one now. Thanks. Denis --TB36FDmn/VVEgNH/ Content-Type: application/octet-stream Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=nl.po.gz Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 H4sICKIdpD8AA25sLnBvAKVWYW/bNhD9nl9xaAakRS3ZbtOhdbt1XZJtwdqmaNMVA/ahtHS2 GEmkQFJ2nWH/fe9IObE3rMNWBwhk63g8vvfuHQ8PDgmfS6eMb1Swzo9IL2hje1KOydhAC9Xq RitHax0qChXTmwtaWNeqMKIlh8CfQspS2qJv2QQVtDWkPa2twxLHqtRmOSL2HRdaNc2GPBcS 5KnkUhcqcEnBpiyhwsptfs6XOc035HpjkGOWQuJHm4WlzNDR3aGIe6jrB92wP/ps1E8ohx2d meA2iEyx72zLMVa2lepjqQtdoCzqbFbyvLBmEUFRK6UbNW/wFHZ2wmfcezf2FYLGwGJ8u278 9uzF6auzLAjOO2usoyqEbjYer9frHMFamdy65Vib0Iyb6cT8c5KU5pRX3NiOHaC0kS/DEUxq lekj1kA4gLNL2U2oE4hyrG/9Upd05448+ODk6c4bZ69ATXZeZr8gJ5CY0bLR8+I3I28vLrMT 0CkIZadgbUYPJpOH2eRRNnlA0+PZ8aP7kyeTyRCcveWV9n+JnU6yh1M8zqbH9yfTIfal8iG7 FeGMvlcu0Il1hhuo4Vlh56qw3zXa9J/yOX87LDLLXi05u2TVziihlwloWdmHoqJnf/sJGXzw O0CnTK/OAevNead5KurEmgA1Z5ebDsWLdsZdo7R5SgUo9hy+0d5mjx8/epJN9xfIQRbssjNT WJH+jB7PdZCYg8MclPnC6U5APDicUZ6PG1sokDI+Pfv+/MXrceAWGwX2s+MtSe+4AS00BAq9 c0bzGXbSO/kthymQIfCSUXOKwZ9Ja/U1yAP9/78SAT4GSYMrWjjVMvq8lpo8LAK4zzmsGTu2 fRN0h8hmYCr2NfVe1LquLBXKEPL5dDgkwCtxGO1uloyosL206iiirnA28ajCNk1qVOvQzTCK UOR7Sn55e1yptOJATql2zSi1VAHAzF2vayklWG4UfrItVb0h1gCNglLNSMooR1Jjjb1r2ZvF lcx1nsBNOcyX4XlSWYuDrysN8HYo3vKbw6BhuwkmOfNaN40IwKtV6vWPY5x/jFRpdY6VR6Mh oXi5AK0ab5MX3DjDXXm39QtYLH1M6zNZL6dWCxx5rVzp7+2j+zNE9HmF0fs11dxfs0yBEuB2 4L9RAq02Q8FDtciXCpbi5uwDQKcarFNPFZ7FkpeklOmU91h/d8VuySDUaPwTMnEKRdzUHItO gei7/fOUmiUl9kDVKysl3xuIAwO6YP9vpE1vWHttDaT51e9D6B+34PwI5e+/+Y/KmH693eTD jiDIV7ZvSmFdRnDJC4XuEijlq994JIAuV9pZIzP4+W1FHyIwO+QMSJTDOm5tu4RTA68IvQLf e+p+/gVnEHdVZkOdKuroAKj4NNpvbPYdtZfaY/UmGu32XIV1Lvre4AZC742F5PTrIG04g1nu AzOglu4yR8NVRkEmQa8Ywx9DzVfRfDpWcIFcWgwFFUkJcdDPlUdrSL/tdaY0TYXOk1iRI2pP Ck7NutcnZ46u9RU8BXEY1DxMqU7VtVxHjFCxBRp9WUuY2u8ksaUynjxw7SM0pejXRou/sTG6 6jHbOPoWrWUARApXMCd6v+2mlOeG5T1NsF/ymg12QHshQPpDSJeOLCpdzwUScUJp6tYuMZmv 6opLlByPWGl2c31FagE26vg2niUWmUyCXSpg3yi+TF2vrVwtLuXSGG1xO0yq27ETpw5YczJ0 mm235HR+I47hehndI42tTCS27at1xVsFYQe7SMnSHIv62d9uG4BsSU4jeR8VvUlFitfiiiei X+CSKRuK5mB7Iq5WL6tAawXKZE8ZrCziRb59ee9r7aJrMdzidQOsCR0AvlUytgYnnnMHdZTR uEUmUUQyGVcYpxgNqcEGU8jpohsAkFmOqDYS6Hh3dg7C6pzFhVgCa6evxOQxbiRZtGigtrco SqK218OYBYaOIf2nUdtxNq/w65C61SI/jjcF3CzSzebWqIZGj/vsCPfOwZ+vcLUA2wwAAA== --TB36FDmn/VVEgNH/-- --- Received: (at 218642-close) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Nov 2003 18:24:39 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 05 12:24:39 2003 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AHSKd-000794-00; Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:24:39 -0600 Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
Bug#211621: marked as done (libc6: upgrade causes lwres-related breakage; sshd hangs trying to login)
Your message dated Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:32:44 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#205099: Please check these bugs with the latest glibc
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 19 Sep 2003 02:01:07 +
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Sep 18 21:01:04 2003
Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from surveyor.mars.org [209.126.142.251]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1A0Aa0-00040l-00; Thu, 18 Sep 2003 21:01:04 -0500
Received: from mars.org (rrcs-west-66-27-52-234.biz.rr.com [66.27.52.234])
by surveyor.mars.org (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with SMTP id h8J213jY020622;
Thu, 18 Sep 2003 19:01:03 -0700
Received: (nullmailer pid 25744 invoked by uid 1000);
Fri, 19 Sep 2003 02:01:03 -
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Rob Leslie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: libc6: upgrade causes lwres-related breakage; sshd hangs trying to login
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.28
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 19:01:03 -0700
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-10.8 required=4.0
tests=HAS_PACKAGE,SIGNATURE_LONG_SPARSE
autolearn=ham version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_9_16
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_9_16
(1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.2-7
Severity: grave
Tags: sid
Justification: renders package unusable
Using an /etc/nsswitch.conf line as follows:
hosts: files lwres [!unavail=return] dns
(with the libnss-lwres 0.93-4 package installed), sshd will hang after
accepting but before authenticating a connection.
On the client side, the last bit of ssh verbosity is:
debug1: SSH2_MSG_NEWKEYS received
debug1: done: ssh_kex2.
debug1: send SSH2_MSG_SERVICE_REQUEST
debug1: service_accept: ssh-userauth
debug1: got SSH2_MSG_SERVICE_ACCEPT
On the server side, strace reports no further activity after:
[pid 25736] read(5, \0\0\0\27, 4) = 4
[pid 25736] read(5, \3\0\0\0\16ssh-connection\0\0\0\0, 23) = 23
[pid 25736] read(5, \0\0\0\5, 4) = 4
[pid 25736] read(5, \n\0\0\0\0, 5)= 5
[pid 25736] time(NULL) = 1063936118
[pid 25736] open(/etc/nologin, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
[pid 25736] getuid32() = 0
[pid 25736] open(/etc/passwd, O_RDONLY) = 3
[pid 25736] fcntl64(3, F_GETFD) = 0
[pid 25736] fcntl64(3, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = 0
[pid 25736] _llseek(3, 0, [0], SEEK_CUR) = 0
[pid 25736] fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=1033, ...}) = 0
[pid 25736] mmap2(NULL, 1033, PROT_READ, MAP_SHARED, 3, 0) = 0x40016000
[pid 25736] _llseek(3, 1033, [1033], SEEK_SET) = 0
[pid 25736] munmap(0x40016000, 1033)= 0
[pid 25736] close(3)= 0
[pid 25736] open(/etc/shadow, O_RDONLY) = 3
[pid 25736] fcntl64(3, F_GETFD) = 0
[pid 25736] fcntl64(3, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = 0
[pid 25736] _llseek(3, 0, [0], SEEK_CUR) = 0
[pid 25736] fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0640, st_size=708, ...}) = 0
[pid 25736] mmap2(NULL, 708, PROT_READ, MAP_SHARED, 3, 0) = 0x40016000
[pid 25736] _llseek(3, 708, [708], SEEK_SET) = 0
[pid 25736] munmap(0x40016000, 708) = 0
[pid 25736] close(3)= 0
[pid 25736] getuid32() = 0
[pid 25736] geteuid32() = 0
[pid 25736] ioctl(0, SNDCTL_TMR_TIMEBASE, 0xbfffecc0) = -1 ENOTTY (Inappropriate ioctl
for device)
[pid 25736] ioctl(0, SNDCTL_TMR_TIMEBASE, 0xbfffecb0) = -1 ENOTTY (Inappropriate ioctl
for device)
[pid 25736] time([1063936118]) = 1063936118
[pid 25736] getpid()= 25736
[pid 25736] rt_sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, NULL, [RTMIN], 8) = 0
[pid 25736] rt_sigsuspend([]
This problem does not occur if /etc/nsswitch.conf is changed to:
hosts: files dns
Or if a version of libc6 prior to 2.3.2 is installed.
--
Rob Leslie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux phobos 2.4.21-4-686-smp #1 SMP Sun Aug 3 00:31:17 EST 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Versions of packages libc6 depends on:
ii libdb1-compat 2.1.3-7The Berkeley database routines [gl
-- no debconf information
---
Received: (at 211621-done) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Nov 2003 18:33:22 +
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 05 12:33:11
Bug#219180: Forgot the file
Once again, I have forgotten the file. It can be downloaded from here: http://crustytoothpaste.ath.cx/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/rpc/rpc/ldl.c?content-type=text%2Fplainrev=1.2 -- Brian M. Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0x560553e7 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#219356: libc6: i586 optimized libs
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 11:29:04PM +0100, Emmanuel Fuste wrote: Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.2.ds1-9 Severity: wishlist Tags: experimental sid Pleease, include an optimized i586 lib package like for i686 in next release. My good hold dual pentium 233mmx computer will be very very thankful to you. Do you have evidence that it really makes a difference? I'd be quite surprised. For now you can get a 486-optimized library by using a 2.6 kernel and NPTL, and that should be pretty good. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#219356: libc6: i586 optimized libs
On Wed, 2003-11-05 at 23:35, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 11:29:04PM +0100, Emmanuel Fuste wrote: Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.2.ds1-9 Severity: wishlist Tags: experimental sid Pleease, include an optimized i586 lib package like for i686 in next release. My good hold dual pentium 233mmx computer will be very very thankful to you. Do you have evidence that it really makes a difference? I'd be quite surprised. For now you can get a 486-optimized library by using a 2.6 kernel and NPTL, and that should be pretty good. A difference yes, with the previous attempt of a -i586 and -i686 optimized packages (one or two years ago I don't remember) the difference was visually perceptible under XFree and gnome (and speed of dpkg too). A huge difference ? I don't know, I never made precise timing tests, but I could for you if you release a experimental or testing package and tell me which kind of timing test you are interested in. But, on such an old computer with such modern beasts (gnome etc), good alignement and every saved cpu cycles are a big win. (and a i586 package if similar in size to the actual -i686 is only about 1Mo). On SMP 586 systems, it is more a important too, better cache friendly code is a must: the L2 cache is shared across the two CPU... Your are more competent than me to see if -i586 builds technically worth it. I just create this report because I was thinking that there is none because there is no interest in it because of the obsolescence and the scareity of this kind of computer like for the -i586smp debian kernel package. Cheers, Emmanuel. -- Emmanuel Fust [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#219356: I also think libc6-i586 would be useful
libc6-i686 won't work in a K6. An libc6-i586 would be useful for using NPTL on a i586 (if it works, I recall at least Gentoo's glibc didn't compile NTPL in a i586. I recall seeing somewhere it needed a couple of small patches to work). If NPTL works correctly in a 486, a libc6-i486 could be used instead of a libc6-i586 (but I don't think enough people use a 486-class machine nowadays for it to make sense; I see lots of Pentiums, Pentiums MMX and K6s but few 486s around here). -- Cesar Eduardo Barros [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: remove my address from your mail lists
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#219356: I also think libc6-i586 would be useful
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 11:21:16PM -0200, Cesar Eduardo Barros wrote: libc6-i686 won't work in a K6. An libc6-i586 would be useful for using NPTL on a i586 (if it works, I recall at least Gentoo's glibc didn't compile NTPL in a i586. I recall seeing somewhere it needed a couple of small patches to work). If NPTL works correctly in a 486, a libc6-i486 could be used instead of a libc6-i586 (but I don't think enough people use a 486-class machine nowadays for it to make sense; I see lots of Pentiums, Pentiums MMX and K6s but few 486s around here). The NPTL libraries included with the main libc6 package are already optimized for i486. Doing them for i586 instead would be a little tricky. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
