Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Mark Weaver]

Would I be correct in assuming that you're running Netscape when this
happens? If this is the case then it's a java problem. Check the list
message archive for messages dealing with this. From what I can remember
there's a a few things you can do to fix this problem. It has something
to do with the way 4.73 is handling the java, although I can't remember
specifically what that was.

David Talbot wrote:
> 
> I've noticed ld.linux.so.2 taking up most of my CPU usage on gtop and wanted to
> know what it is/why it's taking up so much CPU ect.
> 
> Can anyone enlighten me?
> 
> --
> -David Talbot
> Those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither. -B. Franklin

-- 
Mark

I love my Linux box...
  REASON #1 -- ...it isn't Windows!
Registered Linux user #1299563

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Pelon]

David,

ld is the GNU linker. It links various object
files to act in unison as though they were a
single program.

I, too, find ld sucking up all my CPU. It happens
only while running Netscape. Next time you have
the problem, open up xterm, and run pstree. You
may find that Netscape branches off
of ld-linux.so.

This is a problem with Netscape that might be
resolved in the upcoming Mozilla version.

I recommend that you monitor your CPU usage with
xosview, an applet in gnome, or ktop in KDE
(which can be put on the panel so you can keep an
eye on it).

You can remedy the situation by right clicking ld
or Netscape while in gtop and choosing "kill
now". Or you can type "kill PID" in an xterm,
where PID is the process ID of ld. You will lose
what you are doing in Netscape.

Pelon




On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, you wrote:
> I've noticed ld.linux.so.2 taking up most of my CPU usage on gtop and wanted to
> know what it is/why it's taking up so much CPU ect.
> 
> Can anyone enlighten me?
> 
> -- 
> -David Talbot
> Those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither. -B. Franklin

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Sheldon Lee Wen]

Denis,

> 
> What is it doing with this ld-linux library (normally, one would expect a
> program to LOAD a shared library, not to start as a child of it, or have I
> missed something?)

I posted this before Denis. Most likely something like user level
threads.
User level threads run out of a shared library. It could also be using
some
compatibility libs like you mentioned. This could keep it ld-linux
running
constantly. It would also explain why if you kill it it kills netscape.

If I'm wrong let me know wny.


-- 
==
Sheldon Lee Wenhttp://members.xoom.com/Lycadican 
"Superstition is a word the ignorant use to describe their ignorance."
  -- Sifu.
==

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[webmedic]

I used the nightly builds from a few nights ago and the mail agent is mostly
kind of working and it is now more stable on linux than windows.


On Fri, 26 Nov 1999, you wrote:
> > By the way: Has anyone tried the mozzila lately? Last time I tried it
> > (july) it was still very messy, but I have heard some claims of M11 beeing
> > "allmost usable". That would be about the same as my netscape .-)
> 
> I tried the Mozilla binaries a couple of days ago on both Win95 and Linux.
> It "worked" (if you can call it that) better in 95 than in Linux.  Could
> not get the freakin' thing to use the disk cache though so everytime I
> would hit the back button it would re-request the web page, most annoying.
> I tried several times to set the preferences for the cache but it never
> seemed to save them.  In Linux it crashed on slashdot whenever I used the
> down arrow to scroll down.  It is kind of usuable in the sense that it has
> no problems displaying any of the web pages I visited, but it still seems
> unstable IMHO, not something I want to use everyday.  Other people though
> seem to have had better luck than me so your results may vary.
> 
> > good night to everyone
> > 
> > cu
> > Denis
> >
-- 
He must increase but I must decrease---

Holliness unto the Lord
Name:   Brook Humphrey
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
webmaster:  thelinuxstop.com
webmester:  webmedic.net
Owner:  Mobile PC Medic

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Ivan J. Wagner]

> By the way: Has anyone tried the mozzila lately? Last time I tried it
> (july) it was still very messy, but I have heard some claims of M11 beeing
> "allmost usable". That would be about the same as my netscape .-)

I tried the Mozilla binaries a couple of days ago on both Win95 and Linux.
It "worked" (if you can call it that) better in 95 than in Linux.  Could
not get the freakin' thing to use the disk cache though so everytime I
would hit the back button it would re-request the web page, most annoying.
I tried several times to set the preferences for the cache but it never
seemed to save them.  In Linux it crashed on slashdot whenever I used the
down arrow to scroll down.  It is kind of usuable in the sense that it has
no problems displaying any of the web pages I visited, but it still seems
unstable IMHO, not something I want to use everyday.  Other people though
seem to have had better luck than me so your results may vary.

> good night to everyone
> 
> cu
>   Denis
> 

RE: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Marc . MOURIER]

I have "upgraded" netscape with the mk6.1 package and now, it segfault every
time!!! good luck for me...i only use kfm ;)


> :>it's already zombied...
> :> 
> :>>  > 
> :>> 
> And further along the same line... 
> 
> 
> 
> I KNOW THE GOD DAMN NETSCAPE IS OFFICIALLY DEAD
> (i.e. zombi/defunct/whatever) I JUST HATE TO WORK WITH A 
> PROGRAM WHICH IS
> SUPPOSED TO BE DEAD. I ALSO HATE THE IDEA OF HURTING ITS 
> RELATIVES IF I
> WANT IT TO FINALY DISAPPEAR.  .-)
> 
> 
> 
> I mean, come on - how would you feel to work with someone who is
> officially dead?:-O 
> Like - you see someone you work with beeing run-over by a 
> train, and next
> morning - there he is, drinking coffee and reading slashdot. Would you
> consider this normal?:-(
> 
> 
> Now, what is going on with netscape? I thought I have seen just about
> every stupid surprise this program can give, yet there comes 
> another one.
> 
> What is it doing with this ld-linux library (normally, one 
> would expect a
> program to LOAD a shared library, not to start as a child of 
> it, or have I
> missed something?) 
> I know how it happens (a "netscape" script does it), I would like to
> understand WHY. For instance, why does the netscape use 
> compat-glibc at
> all - is there some reason against compiling it with glibc 
> 2.1? It is a
> 4.61 version I am talking about... 
> How about the 4.7 version? Is it linked against glibc 2.1? 
> Does it behave
> better or worse than 4.61? In my expirience every version of netscape
> since some 3.x was less stable than the previous one. This is a great
> achivement considering the fact that its functionality does not seam
> to grow (Oh, yes it got a "shopping" button...). 
> 
> 
> 
> By the way: Has anyone tried the mozzila lately? Last time I tried it
> (july) it was still very messy, but I have heard some claims 
> of M11 beeing
> "allmost usable". That would be about the same as my netscape .-)
> 
> Same question, but concerning the wine - anyone gave it a try 
> lately?  
> 
> good night to everyone
> 
> cu
>   Denis
> 

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Axalon Bloodstone]

On Fri, 26 Nov 1999, Denis Havlik wrote:

> :>it's already zombied...
> :> 
> :>>  > 
> :>> 
> And further along the same line... 
> 
> 
> 
> I KNOW THE GOD DAMN NETSCAPE IS OFFICIALLY DEAD
> (i.e. zombi/defunct/whatever) I JUST HATE TO WORK WITH A PROGRAM WHICH IS
> SUPPOSED TO BE DEAD. I ALSO HATE THE IDEA OF HURTING ITS RELATIVES IF I
> WANT IT TO FINALY DISAPPEAR.  .-)
> 
> 
> 
> I mean, come on - how would you feel to work with someone who is
> officially dead?:-O 
> Like - you see someone you work with beeing run-over by a train, and next
> morning - there he is, drinking coffee and reading slashdot. Would you
> consider this normal?:-(
> 
> 
> Now, what is going on with netscape? I thought I have seen just about
> every stupid surprise this program can give, yet there comes another one.
> 
> What is it doing with this ld-linux library (normally, one would expect a
> program to LOAD a shared library, not to start as a child of it, or have I
> missed something?) 
> I know how it happens (a "netscape" script does it), I would like to
> understand WHY. For instance, why does the netscape use compat-glibc at
> all - is there some reason against compiling it with glibc 2.1? It is a
> 4.61 version I am talking about... 

Well honestly we (and every other dist out there) would love to be able to
recompile it for the correct glibc. I haven't seen anything from them as
to why their so out of date with it. (somebody at the office send em
another set of cd's and phone call) I don't see them listening but we can
try again anyway :) they'll either give in or tell us we can't ship it any
more, either way we win IMO..

> How about the 4.7 version? Is it linked against glibc 2.1? Does it behave
> better or worse than 4.61? In my expirience every version of netscape
> since some 3.x was less stable than the previous one. This is a great
> achivement considering the fact that its functionality does not seam
> to grow (Oh, yes it got a "shopping" button...). 

Doubt i use it enough for my accountings to matter, no matter what
version.

> 
> 
> By the way: Has anyone tried the mozzila lately? Last time I tried it
> (july) it was still very messy, but I have heard some claims of M11 beeing
> "allmost usable". That would be about the same as my netscape .-)

Nope i gave up compileing that beast, all that time and the end product i
just can't say anything nice about so i wont say anymore ;)
 
> Same question, but concerning the wine - anyone gave it a try lately?  

had a nice white one today, but i've no clue the brewer :)

> good night to everyone
> 
> cu
>   Denis
> 

--
MandrakeSoft  http://www.mandrakesoft.com/
--Axalon

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Denis Havlik]

:>it's already zombied...
:> 
:>>  > 
:>> 
And further along the same line... 



I KNOW THE GOD DAMN NETSCAPE IS OFFICIALLY DEAD
(i.e. zombi/defunct/whatever) I JUST HATE TO WORK WITH A PROGRAM WHICH IS
SUPPOSED TO BE DEAD. I ALSO HATE THE IDEA OF HURTING ITS RELATIVES IF I
WANT IT TO FINALY DISAPPEAR.  .-)



I mean, come on - how would you feel to work with someone who is
officially dead?:-O 
Like - you see someone you work with beeing run-over by a train, and next
morning - there he is, drinking coffee and reading slashdot. Would you
consider this normal?:-(


Now, what is going on with netscape? I thought I have seen just about
every stupid surprise this program can give, yet there comes another one.

What is it doing with this ld-linux library (normally, one would expect a
program to LOAD a shared library, not to start as a child of it, or have I
missed something?) 
I know how it happens (a "netscape" script does it), I would like to
understand WHY. For instance, why does the netscape use compat-glibc at
all - is there some reason against compiling it with glibc 2.1? It is a
4.61 version I am talking about... 
How about the 4.7 version? Is it linked against glibc 2.1? Does it behave
better or worse than 4.61? In my expirience every version of netscape
since some 3.x was less stable than the previous one. This is a great
achivement considering the fact that its functionality does not seam
to grow (Oh, yes it got a "shopping" button...). 



By the way: Has anyone tried the mozzila lately? Last time I tried it
(july) it was still very messy, but I have heard some claims of M11 beeing
"allmost usable". That would be about the same as my netscape .-)

Same question, but concerning the wine - anyone gave it a try lately?  

good night to everyone

cu
Denis

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2 amd et.al.

[Axalon Bloodstone]

On Thu, 25 Nov 1999, WH Bouterse wrote:

> Well here is the latest
> 
> This am after being on all night, netscape still working, able to get
> mail etc
> but after a couple hours working various programs;
> I try to access a web site, netscape stalls out, the 
> 'ld-linux.so.2'  in 'top' and 'ps ax' with 'dns helper' appears.
> 
> I shutdown amd, no change.
> I check inetd, yes it is up and running
> 
> ifconfig shows nothing unusual; however no remote ping, 
> telnet, etc. but locahost okay. 
> 
> I exit and log out of everything and try again, No Luck
> I reboot, No Luck
> I do a 'cold boot', No Luck
> 
> At System Commanders prompt I boot into M$, everything works fine !!!???
> 
> I restart and boot into L-M 6.1, NOW REMOTE IS WORKING AGAIN !!!??? 
> "But for Howlong", I ask?
> 
> Conclusions:
> 
> 1)Somehow outside access gets disabled.
> 2)Usually first noticed using Netscape 
> 3)Cannot necessarily blame Netscape on this one
> as rebooting and not bringing up Netscape I still
> have no remote access.
> 4) Access out of my nic card and cable-modem is disabled somehow
> 5) M$ IS FIXING MY LINUX-MANDRAKE PLEASE HELP
> BEFORE BILL GATES FINDS OUT !!!:>) 

One of two things is shutting you down, 

dhcp doesn't renew its lease 
(try switching pump for dhcp or dhcp for pump, as your bootproto for the
ethX)

or 

You have an auto senseing 10/100 network card, that can hopefully be set
with a util to use a specified speed.
 
> William Bouterse
> Juneau, Alaska
> 

--
MandrakeSoft  http://www.mandrakesoft.com/
--Axalon

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Axalon Bloodstone]

On Thu, 25 Nov 1999, Denis Havlik wrote:

> :~>killall -9 25893 means that you want to kill a process named 25893. No
> :~>process has this name!
> 
> Sorry, typing mistake. Here is cut'paste version:
> 
> [denis@marvin havlik]$ ps ax|grep nets 
> 27851 ?  Z 0:00 [netscape ] 
> 27864 pts/2 S 0:00 grep nets

it's already zombied...
 
>  > 
> 
> [denis@marvin havlik]$ kill -9 27851 
> [denis@marvin havlik]$ killall -9 netscape 
> 
> 

of course not it's already dead

> [denis@marvin havlik]$ ps ax|grep nets 
> 27851 ?  Z 0:00 [netscape ] 
> 27867 pts/2 S 0:00 grep nets
> 
> Netscape does not even notice I have tried to kill it. Obviously, the
> netscape pretends to be a library, or the library thinks it is a netscape.
> Whatever - it stinks. And, yes I know that I can kill the netscape by
> killing the library, but it stinks nevertheless.

Correct you have to kill it's parent proccess, or it will sit there in
defunct heaven..

> ?:-0
> 
>   Denis
> 

--
MandrakeSoft  http://www.mandrakesoft.com/
--Axalon

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2 amd et.al.

[WH Bouterse]

Well here is the latest

This am after being on all night, netscape still working, able to get
mail etc
but after a couple hours working various programs;
I try to access a web site, netscape stalls out, the 
'ld-linux.so.2'  in 'top' and 'ps ax' with 'dns helper' appears.

I shutdown amd, no change.
I check inetd, yes it is up and running

ifconfig shows nothing unusual; however no remote ping, 
telnet, etc. but locahost okay. 

I exit and log out of everything and try again, No Luck
I reboot, No Luck
I do a 'cold boot', No Luck

At System Commanders prompt I boot into M$, everything works fine !!!???

I restart and boot into L-M 6.1, NOW REMOTE IS WORKING AGAIN !!!??? 
"But for Howlong", I ask?

Conclusions:

1)Somehow outside access gets disabled.
2)Usually first noticed using Netscape 
3)Cannot necessarily blame Netscape on this one
as rebooting and not bringing up Netscape I still
have no remote access.
4) Access out of my nic card and cable-modem is disabled somehow
5) M$ IS FIXING MY LINUX-MANDRAKE PLEASE HELP
BEFORE BILL GATES FINDS OUT !!!:>) 


William Bouterse
Juneau, Alaska

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2 and amd

[Denis Havlik]

:~>Has anyone else killed 'amd'  permanently and lived to tell the tale !!

I have been using both "amd" and "autofs" since the "autofs" came to life,
and i can assure you that "autofs" runs much more reliably than amd.

Therefore, I use autofs to mount "homes" (every machine exports its home
directory to "thrusted-hosts" netgroup, and autofs mounts all the "home"
directories it can see to /homes/MACHINE). Basically, these "homes"
directories have never given me any headache.

Then, I had to add an user whose home-directory came from completely
different system, and it was not exported as "home", but as
"home/MACHINE", or so - and I thought - what the hell, I will just give
him a "/net/MACHINE/home/MACHINE"  path to his home-directory and forget
about it. Guess what? Several days later, amd got stuck and a few days of
calculations were gone. This happened repeatedly, so i had to add a rule
to "autofs" config file and everything works OK since then.

I still keep "amd" running with default settings, because i cannot bring
the "autofs" to mount "anything" under "/net" the way amd does (anybody
knows how to do it), but I do not use it for anything crytical anymore. 

:~>The auto-mount of amd is not necessary but I take it that means I would
:~>have to manually 'mount' each file system/partition ? My brain is tired
:~>again so bear with me 
:~>if this is all common knowledge...???

Either that, or you mount everything from "fstab" or you let the "autofs"
do it.

cu
Denis
-
Mag. Denis Havlik  
University of Vienna||| e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Austria(@ @)   tel: (++431) 4277/51179 
---oOO--(_)--OOo-

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Denis Havlik]

:~>killall -9 25893 means that you want to kill a process named 25893. No
:~>process has this name!

Sorry, typing mistake. Here is cut'paste version:

[denis@marvin havlik]$ ps ax|grep nets 
27851 ?  Z 0:00 [netscape ] 
27864 pts/2 S 0:00 grep nets

 > 

[denis@marvin havlik]$ kill -9 27851 
[denis@marvin havlik]$ killall -9 netscape 



[denis@marvin havlik]$ ps ax|grep nets 
27851 ?  Z 0:00 [netscape ] 
27867 pts/2 S 0:00 grep nets

Netscape does not even notice I have tried to kill it. Obviously, the
netscape pretends to be a library, or the library thinks it is a netscape.
Whatever - it stinks. And, yes I know that I can kill the netscape by
killing the library, but it stinks nevertheless.

?:-0

Denis

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2 and amd

[WH Bouterse]

Looking at 'top'
switching to ps ax
then
kill -9 PID # is usually what I have done. 
Also sometimes kill -9 PID # of 'ld-linux.so'
However I am about to go back to the previous version if this keeps up.
Or maybe some of you coder-gurus can get together with Civileme and cook
something up!

"To Kill or not to Kill, that is the question !!??"

I like that idea . However Axalon or any of you other folks "out
there"..
Has anyone else killed 'amd'  permanently and lived to tell the tale !!
I have never paid much attention to mounting and unmounting files
systems
except for /dev/cdrom or maybe /dev/fd0 etc. I guess thanks to amd,
So from what yu are saying
The auto-mount of amd is not necessary but I take it that means I would
have to manually 'mount' each file system/partition ? My brain is tired
again so bear with me 
if this is all common knowledge...???

I have buggered-up or should I say "have contributed toward greater
bugginess"
of my L-M 6.1 system, so often these last couple months that it seems,
every time I attempt to "Fix" one thing two other things screw up.

Ah Well I love Linux anyway !!!

William "the unrepentent" Bouterse
Juneau, Alaska

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2 and amd

[Sheldon Lee Wen]

> I have not seen such problems with 6.1, but then I decided the upgrade to
> Netscape 4.7 wasn't worth it, and stuck with 4.61.

I'm on 6.1 and still using the old netscape and I have this problem
occassionally
too.

Sheldon.
-- 
==
Sheldon Lee Wenhttp://members.xoom.com/Lycadican 
"Superstition is a word the ignorant use to describe their ignorance."
  -- Sifu.
==

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2 and amd

[alann]

WH Bouterse wrote:
> 
> I too have seen a recent reawakening of the dreaded netscape induced
> 'ld-linux.so '  with 95% CPU usage.
> 
> L-M 6.1,  netscape-common-4.70-1mdk.i586.rpm and
> netscape-communicator-4.70-1mdk.i586.rpm installed
> 
> This will cause netscape to basically cease to be usable at times, yet
> at other times it is merely a brief hiccup and usage is restored.
> 
> At the same time I have noticed something perhaps not related but...???
> 
> Netscape hangs, I 'kill' it try again no luck, suddenly cannot telnet,
> ftp etc
> "no connection to host" appears;
> 

Yea, me too. thats what got me on this topic.

How are you "killing" it?

Top or Process commander??

THis won't do it.

In a terminal:

killall -9 netscape-communicator

This will fix it.
Then restart Nutscrape.



-- 
==
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
running Linux Mandrake 6.1 and/or BeOS.

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[alann]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> folks,
> i was wondering why is it when i run top i can see ld-linux.so.2 running
> occassionally.  Isn't it a library file?  Should it be running as a process??
> 
> Attached sample log:
> 


This might not be exact correct syntax but I also noticed this,
especially with a Netscape
session that this ld-linux.so.2 was running along with netscape.  If you
kill it Netscape dies.
I don't know what Mandrake's reasoning is behind this, but my local
linux buddies tell me it's a
loader, sort of like a wrapper to run netscape.  Anyway, my friend over
a night of irc and beer, told
me how to fix this.  I did and now netscape on my system does not
require the use of the ld-linux file.

I was trying to fix excessive memory use and this process was using more
memory than I thought it should be..
I thought I had logged the session so I had the instructions on how to
do this, but either I didn't or I just
can't find it at the moment.  It did help *slightly* on the amount of
ram uses, but not significant, so I don't
know if it's even worth doing..

I'm sure this doesn't make sense, since I really don't understand at
this point *exactly* what a wrapper does..

Hope this might help a tiny bit..

Alan


-- 
==
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
running Linux Mandrake 6.1 and/or BeOS.

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2 and amd

[Civileme]

WH Bouterse wrote:

> I too have seen a recent reawakening of the dreaded netscape induced
> 'ld-linux.so '  with 95% CPU usage.
>
> L-M 6.1,  netscape-common-4.70-1mdk.i586.rpm and
> netscape-communicator-4.70-1mdk.i586.rpm installed
>
> This will cause netscape to basically cease to be usable at times, yet
> at other times it is merely a brief hiccup and usage is restored.
>
> At the same time I have noticed something perhaps not related but...???
>
> Netscape hangs, I 'kill' it try again no luck, suddenly cannot telnet,
> ftp etc
> "no connection to host" appears;
>
> 'ifconfig' shows everything functioning "A-Okay"
>
> I reboot: system seems to hang on 'AMD' initializing then after 5
> minutes says "OK"
> System still exhibits the same problem???
>
> I reboot into M$ and everything is working fine (with a knowing smile
> from my wife)
>
> I reboot into L-M 6.1 again , no AMD hiccup, everything works fine !!!
>
> What in the "HAPPY HACKING" is going on !!!??? Is my system Haunted  ???
>
> This has been the most "challenging" version of Linux I have ever used,
> or perhaps;
> I know just enough to get into trouble !!??? :-)
>
> William Bouterse
> Juneau, Alaska

I have not seen such problems with 6.1, but then I decided the upgrade to
Netscape 4.7 wasn't worth it, and stuck with 4.61.

Browsers have been an annoyance for a while, for me.  If anyone knows a lot
about the modern requirements of HTML and plug-ins (but not a Christmas
Tree of Browser, Composer, Mailer and ready-made pop-up access for the ad
agencies) and is willing to lead a project, email me.  I have some time for
coding, and there are a couple of projects which could be picked up from an
older state.


Civileme

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2 and amd

[Axalon Bloodstone]

On Wed, 24 Nov 1999, WH Bouterse wrote:

> I will certainly try that next time this happens?
> 
> I have never had a inetd daemon die before. 

maybe it wasn't dead, it does do throttleing based upon load.

> I would be curious what the causative factors might be.?

kill -9 7167 
"oh s**t, didn't that "ps ax|grep blah" say 7176 ahh poop", been there
done that more than i'd like to admit.

> I recently "commented in" everything and could this be the problem?

Yes but not so likely

> What to open up without too many security risks?

 open only what you need, and only to who you need via firewall rules
The first thing I would do would be kill amd, i've yet to see a use for it
that justifies the risks
 
> This is pretty much a 24/7 , static IP cable-modem connection.
> 
> Thanks for the idea:-)
> 
> William Bouterse
> Juneau, Alaska
> 

--
MandrakeSoft  http://www.mandrakesoft.com/
--Axalon

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Sheldon Lee Wen]

Denis,

There if I'm correct there is a bug in glibc 2.1 ld-linux. The only
reason that
I can think of that it is running as a process is that netscape is using
user level threads.
If netscape dies you can kill ld-linux too.

> :~>i was wondering why is it when i run top i can see ld-linux.so.2 running
> :~>occassionally.  Isn't it a library file?  Should it be running as a process??


Cheers,
Sheldon.

-- 
==
Sheldon Lee Wenhttp://members.xoom.com/Lycadican 
"Superstition is a word the ignorant use to describe their ignorance."
  -- Sifu.
==

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2 and amd

[WH Bouterse]

I will certainly try that next time this happens?

I have never had a inetd daemon die before. 
I would be curious what the causative factors might be.?
I recently "commented in" everything and could this be the problem?
What to open up without too many security risks?

This is pretty much a 24/7 , static IP cable-modem connection.

Thanks for the idea:-)

William Bouterse
Juneau, Alaska

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Sylvain Vignaud]

Denis Havlik wrote:
> This is a funny thing. But it gets even funnier - At my computer, it is
> the Netscape which does it:
> 
> 25879 ?  S 0:01 /usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib/ld-linux.so.2 --library-path
> /usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib /usr/lib/netscape/ne
> 25893 ?  Z 0:00 \_[netscape ]
> 25894 ?  S 0:00  \_ (dns helper)
> 
> Now, the best part is: Netscape is not defunct! It works OK at the moment,
> but the system thinks it is "defunct". Look at this:
> 
> [denis@marvin havlik]$ killall -9 25893
> 25893: no process killed
> 
> "ps axwf" shows exactly the same process running as "defunct", yet I can
> go on browsing with the netscape as if nothing happened. Now, this is what
> I call weird.
killall x : x must be a process NAME : here killall -9 netscape
kill x: x must be a process NUMBER : here kill -9 25893

killall -9 25893 means that you want to kill a process named 25893. No
process has this name!

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2 and amd

[Nick Kay]

At 07:22 24/11/99 -0900, you wrote:

>At the same time I have noticed something perhaps not related but...???
>
>Netscape hangs, I 'kill' it try again no luck, suddenly cannot telnet,
>ftp etc
>"no connection to host" appears;
>
>'ifconfig' shows everything functioning "A-Okay"
>This has been the most "challenging" version of Linux I have ever used,
>or perhaps;
>I know just enough to get into trouble !!??? :-)

Could you try restarting the inetd daemon - or even check
to make sure it's still running?

hih
nick@nexnix

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2 and amd

[WH Bouterse]

I too have seen a recent reawakening of the dreaded netscape induced
'ld-linux.so '  with 95% CPU usage. 

L-M 6.1,  netscape-common-4.70-1mdk.i586.rpm and 
netscape-communicator-4.70-1mdk.i586.rpm installed

This will cause netscape to basically cease to be usable at times, yet
at other times it is merely a brief hiccup and usage is restored.

At the same time I have noticed something perhaps not related but...???

Netscape hangs, I 'kill' it try again no luck, suddenly cannot telnet,
ftp etc
"no connection to host" appears;

'ifconfig' shows everything functioning "A-Okay"

I reboot: system seems to hang on 'AMD' initializing then after 5
minutes says "OK"
System still exhibits the same problem???

I reboot into M$ and everything is working fine (with a knowing smile
from my wife)

I reboot into L-M 6.1 again , no AMD hiccup, everything works fine !!!

What in the "HAPPY HACKING" is going on !!!??? Is my system Haunted  ???

This has been the most "challenging" version of Linux I have ever used,
or perhaps;
I know just enough to get into trouble !!??? :-)

William Bouterse
Juneau, Alaska

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Denis Havlik]

:~>i was wondering why is it when i run top i can see ld-linux.so.2 running
:~>occassionally.  Isn't it a library file?  Should it be running as a process??
:~>
:~>Attached sample log:
:~>
:~>(See attached file: log1.txt)

This is a funny thing. But it gets even funnier - At my computer, it is
the Netscape which does it:

25879 ?  S 0:01 /usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib/ld-linux.so.2 --library-path
/usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib /usr/lib/netscape/ne 
25893 ?  Z 0:00 \_[netscape ]
25894 ?  S 0:00  \_ (dns helper)   

Now, the best part is: Netscape is not defunct! It works OK at the moment,
but the system thinks it is "defunct". Look at this:

[denis@marvin havlik]$ killall -9 25893
25893: no process killed   

"ps axwf" shows exactly the same process running as "defunct", yet I can
go on browsing with the netscape as if nothing happened. Now, this is what
I call weird.

 ?:-O

Denis

 Text - character set unknown

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Duncan Hall]

Did netscape crash or get uncleanly shutdown before you noticed this?
I also see this in top once in a while and always when netscape 4.7
is acting up.
Dunc
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
folks,
    i was wondering why is it when i run top i can see
ld-linux.so.2 running
occassionally.  Isn't it a library file?  Should it be running
as a process??
Attached sample log:
(See attached file: log1.txt)
  
 
Name: log1.txt
   log1.txt   Type: Plain
Text (text/plain)
 
Encoding: base64
   Description:
Text - character set unknown

-- \\- Duncan Hall
- SysAdmin Viator - Sydney AU +61 2 93616137 -\\ --
 

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Dovydas Kulvinskas]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> folks,
> i was wondering why is it when i run top i can see ld-linux.so.2 running
> occassionally.  Isn't it a library file?  Should it be running as a process??
> 
> Attached sample log:
> 
> (See attached file: log1.txt)
> 
>   
>   Name: log1.txt
>log1.txt   Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
>   Encoding: base64
>Description: Text - character set unknown

 update your Netscape to glibc2.1 version

 Dovydas

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Sheldon Lee Wen]

Hi,


> 
> 1011 tty1 S  0:06 /usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib/ld-linux.so.2 --library-path 
>/usr/i386-glibc20-linux
> 1025 tty1 Z  0:00 [netscape ]
> 1026 tty1 S  0:00 (dns helper)
> 
> while running.  Bizarre, huh?  It also has a tendency to lock up MUCH more than
> in 6.0.  When it does lock up, you have to kill off the ld process to get
> Netscape down.  I'm mystified.  How the hell was Netscape compiled in this
> release?

I see this alot. Actually it happens even when netscape isn't running if
I
remember correctly. RPM shows this:

[sheldonl@khardan sheldonl]$ rpm -q --whatprovides ld-linux.so.2
glibc-2.1.1-9mdk
glibc-2.1.1-16mdk

so it leads me to believe that this is a glibc bug. ld is the loader but
I think it may be required to run constantly when a program uses shared
libraries
that it needs to access continuously or things like user level threads.
There is a newer version of glibc out but I haven't tried it b/c I don't
want to break my system. Any ideas?

Cheers,
Sheldon.

-- 
==
Sheldon Lee Wen 
"Superstition is a word the ignorant use to describe their ignorance."
  -- Sifu.
==

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Alan_N]

Lee Burnside wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, you wrote:
> > >I noticed after a while of my box being up that ld-linux.so.2
> > > seems to increase largely in memory and cpu usage. It keeps creeping up
> > > in size. Is this a memory leak? Is there a fix?
> 
> Yeah, I noticed this a while back.  Netscape 4.61 in Mandrake 6.1 reports
> itself as
> 
> 1011 tty1 S  0:06 /usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib/ld-linux.so.2 --library-path 
>/usr/i386-glibc20-linux
> 1025 tty1 Z  0:00 [netscape ]
> 1026 tty1 S  0:00 (dns helper)
> 
> while running.  Bizarre, huh?  It also has a tendency to lock up MUCH more than
> in 6.0.  When it does lock up, you have to kill off the ld process to get
> Netscape down.  I'm mystified.  How the hell was Netscape compiled in this
> release?
> 
> --

Yea! ME TOO!  After the 6.1 install, I noticed my swap file at one point
was 25% utilized!
WHAT?  My swap file NEVER got touched before!  I have a 128 Meg of ram
and I had Netscape open,
netscape mail, Gnomeicu, KRN ( kde's news reader ) and x-chat..

25% swap usage?  I too noticed this ld-linux.so.2 and didn't know what
it was.
Killed it, Netscape died..

There's got to be something wrong with this situation.. I mean, even
WINDOWS doesn't use that much ram ( or
maybe close! )..

I too notice this file grows in size as the evening rolls on..  If
anyone's got a better way, I sure would like to
hear about it!

Alan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Lee Burnside]

On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, you wrote:
> >I noticed after a while of my box being up that ld-linux.so.2
> > seems to increase largely in memory and cpu usage. It keeps creeping up
> > in size. Is this a memory leak? Is there a fix?

Yeah, I noticed this a while back.  Netscape 4.61 in Mandrake 6.1 reports
itself as

1011 tty1 S  0:06 /usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib/ld-linux.so.2 --library-path 
/usr/i386-glibc20-linux 
1025 tty1 Z  0:00 [netscape ]
1026 tty1 S  0:00 (dns helper)

while running.  Bizarre, huh?  It also has a tendency to lock up MUCH more than
in 6.0.  When it does lock up, you have to kill off the ld process to get
Netscape down.  I'm mystified.  How the hell was Netscape compiled in this
release?

-- 
Lee Burnside -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.phys.ttu.edu/~tljlb/

"Many a good hanging prevents a bad marriage."
--The Bard

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Sergio Korlowsky]

Andrew Morton wrote:

> Sheldon Lee Wen wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >I noticed after a while of my box being up that ld-linux.so.2
> > seems to increase largely in memory and cpu usage. It keeps creeping up
> > in size. Is this a memory leak? Is there a fix?
>
> huh?  ld-linux is the 'interpreter' which ELF executables ask the kernel
> to launch to get them running.  How do you get a process called
> ld-linux.so.2?  I'd be interested in seeing your 'ps auxfw' output.
>
> Anyway, you should be studying...

Yes there is a ps called ld-linux.so.2 but it in cooker,
and it comes up only with netscape. closing netscape closes ld-linux as
well... (?)
I have seen this also.

Sergio Korllowsky

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Axalon Bloodstone]

On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Fabien Deschodt wrote:

> 
> > huh?  ld-linux is the 'interpreter' which ELF executables ask the kernel
> > to launch to get them running.  How do you get a process called
> > ld-linux.so.2?  I'd be interested in seeing your 'ps auxfw' output.
> 
> It also appears sometimes with me, and when it appears, it really slows down
> the system. However, it is not reproduceable, but next time it happens, I
> will post a nice `top`or `ps` output.
> I think this comes generally using Netscape.
> 
> Fabien Deschodt

yes, 
It is netscape running thru its wrapper script. :(

--
MandrakeSoft  http://www.mandrakesoft.com/
--Axalon

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Fabien Deschodt]

> huh?  ld-linux is the 'interpreter' which ELF executables ask the kernel
> to launch to get them running.  How do you get a process called
> ld-linux.so.2?  I'd be interested in seeing your 'ps auxfw' output.

It also appears sometimes with me, and when it appears, it really slows down
the system. However, it is not reproduceable, but next time it happens, I
will post a nice `top`or `ps` output.
I think this comes generally using Netscape.

Fabien Deschodt

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Sheldon Lee Wen]

Andrew,


> huh?  ld-linux is the 'interpreter' which ELF executables ask the kernel
> to launch to get them running.  How do you get a process called
> ld-linux.so.2?  I'd be interested in seeing your 'ps auxfw' output.

color me crazy but it's there.

> 
> Anyway, you should be studying...
I am. I was doing an assignment for Natural Language Processing when I
noticed
it. My friend Jon noticed it to. Apparently on his machine after three
days of
uptime it was taking up 30 megs or something.


--- here it is.

 10:29pm  up  4:46,  1 user,  load average: 3.09, 2.11, 1.76
87 processes: 78 sleeping, 5 running, 1 zombie, 3 stopped
CPU states: 67.1% user, 24.6% system,  0.0% nice,  8.2% idle
Mem:   79296K av,  73324K used,   5972K free,  30768K shrd,  11480K buff
Swap: 128448K av,  46828K used,  81620K free 23048K
cached
 
  PID USER PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT  LIB %CPU %MEM   TIME
COMMAND
  636 root   3   0 19068  13M  1516 R   0  8.5 17.6   7:27 X
  702 sheldonl  14   0  3240 1992   616 R   0  5.9  2.5   0:49
kbgndwm
22644 sheldonl   0   0 14180 8596  2560 D   0  2.6 10.8   1:08
ld-linux.so.2
13577 root   1   0   408  408   324 D   0  1.9  0.5   0:00 rm

-- 
==
Sheldon Lee Wen 
"Superstition is a word the ignorant use to describe their ignorance."
  -- Sifu.
==

USER   PID %CPU %MEM   VSZ  RSS TTY  STAT START   TIME COMMAND
root 1  0.0  0.0  1148   68 ?S17:43   0:02 init
root 2  0.0  0.0 00 ?SW   17:43   0:15 [kflushd]
root 3  0.0  0.0 00 ?SW   17:43   0:00 [kpiod]
root 4  0.0  0.0 00 ?SW   17:43   0:12 [kswapd]
root 7  0.0  0.0 00 ?SW   17:43   0:00 [scsi_eh_0]
bin285  0.0  0.0  11440 ?SW   17:43   0:00 [portmap]
root   337  0.0  0.2  1204  204 ?S17:43   0:00 syslogd
root   347  0.0  0.0  14360 ?SW   17:43   0:00 [klogd]
root   366  0.0  0.1  1296  120 ?S17:43   0:00 crond
root   381  0.0  0.0  11920 ?SW   17:43   0:00 [inetd]
root   426  0.0  0.0  12200 ?SW   17:43   0:00 [lpd]
root   464  0.0  0.0  1180   60 ?S17:43   0:03 gpm -t ps/2
root   479  0.0  0.0  6208   44 ?S17:43   0:01 httpd
nobody 505  0.0  0.0  62320 ?SW   17:43   0:00  \_ [httpd]
root   493  0.0  0.0  17480 ?SW   17:43   0:00 [safe_mysqld]
root   499  0.0  0.0  3348   48 ?S17:43   0:00  \_ [mysqld]
root   532  0.0  0.0  3348   48 ?S17:43   0:00  \_ [mysqld]
root   533  0.0  0.0  3348   48 ?S17:43   0:00  \_ [mysqld]
root   549  0.0  0.0  11160 ?SW   17:43   0:00 [vmnet-bridge]
xfs574  0.0  1.8  4660 1428 ?S17:43   0:09 xfs -port -1
root   626  0.0  0.0  11240 tty1 SW   17:43   0:00 [mingetty]
root   627  0.0  0.0  11240 tty2 SW   17:43   0:00 [mingetty]
root   628  0.0  0.0  11240 tty3 SW   17:43   0:00 [mingetty]
root   629  0.0  0.0  11240 tty4 SW   17:43   0:00 [mingetty]
root   630  0.0  0.0  11240 tty5 SW   17:43   0:00 [mingetty]
root   631  0.0  0.0  11240 tty6 SW   17:43   0:00 [mingetty]
root   632  0.0  0.0  60080 ?SW   17:43   0:00 [prefdm]
root   636  2.6 13.2 22304 10536 ?   S17:43   7:22  \_ /etc/X11/X -dpi 100 
-auth /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xdm/authdir/A:0-gCua
root   637  0.0  0.0  69480 ?SW   17:43   0:00  \_ [prefdm]
sheldonl   656  0.4  1.4  6768 1168 ?S17:45   1:08  \_ kwm
sheldonl   694  0.0  0.6  6380  476 ?S17:45   0:01  \_ kwmsound
sheldonl   695  0.0  1.9  7168 1524 ?S17:45   0:09  \_ kpanel
sheldonl   707  0.0  0.4  2924  392 ?S17:45   0:01  |   \_ xload 
-nolabel
sheldonl   697  0.0  2.6 10008 2128 ?S17:45   0:07  \_ kfm
sheldonl   767  0.0  0.3  7028  308 ?S17:58   0:00  |   \_ konsole 
-icon konsole.xpm -miniicon konsole.xpmi -cap
sheldonl   768  0.0  0.0  20440 pts/0SW   17:58   0:00  |   |   \_ 
[bash]
root   769  0.0  0.0  19400 pts/0SW   17:58   0:00  |   |   \_ 
[su]
root   770  0.0  0.0  20120 pts/0SW   17:58   0:00  |   |  
 \_ [bash]
sheldonl   778  0.2  2.2  7732 1788 ?S17:59   0:39  |   \_ konsole 
-icon konsole.xpm -miniicon konsole.xpmi -cap
sheldonl   779  0.0  0.0  20560 pts/1SW   17:59   0:00  |   |   \_ 
[bash]
root  1774  0.0  0.0  19400 pts/1SW   18:01   0:00  |   |   \_ 
[su]
root  1775  0.0  0.7  2044  572 pts/1S18:01   0:00  |   |  
 \_ bash
ro

Re: [expert] ld-linux.so.2

[Andrew Morton]

Sheldon Lee Wen wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>I noticed after a while of my box being up that ld-linux.so.2
> seems to increase largely in memory and cpu usage. It keeps creeping up
> in size. Is this a memory leak? Is there a fix?

huh?  ld-linux is the 'interpreter' which ELF executables ask the kernel
to launch to get them running.  How do you get a process called
ld-linux.so.2?  I'd be interested in seeing your 'ps auxfw' output.

Anyway, you should be studying...