On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 17:55:40 +0100
Joachim Breitner wrote:
> now that the ghc package is in unstable for 10 days, the bug is
> actually holding back the transition (not exclusively, but still).
> Kaol, do you want to close the bug now? Or ask the release team for a
> squeeze-ignore tag?
the prob
Hi,
Am Montag, den 01.03.2010, 14:01 +0100 schrieb Andrea Lusuardi - UoVoBW:
> it seemed unlikely to me too, but what else can i look into?
> thanks again for your time, if the bug seems unsolvable, the problem
> might be a misconfiguration on my side, i do not want to steal too
> much time from
On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 10:15:17 +0200
Kari Pahula wrote:
> > Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-rc5 (SMP w/2 CPU cores; PREEMPT)
>
> This is from your initial bug report. Looks like you've built your
> own kernel. Are you still using it? What would happen if you tried a
> stock kernel from Debian?
i usually b
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 04:54:11PM +0100, Andrea Lusuardi - UoVoBW wrote:
> i just did the chroot, a debian sid with deboostrap from the mirror
> ftp.de.debian.org (the .it. one was way too slow)
Okay, so that rules out any local changes, save for the kernel.
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-rc5 (SMP w/2
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 14:13:48 +0200
Kari Pahula wrote:
> Let's try to narrow this down a bit. Could you please try setting up
> a clean chroot environment and try ghci out there? See man
> debootstrap for instructions on how to do this. You may need a few GB
> of disk space for this.
i just did
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 01:00:09PM +0100, Andrea Lusuardi - UoVoBW wrote:
> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
> 0x0178d776 in ?? ()
> (gdb) where
> #0 0x0178d776 in ?? ()
> #1 0x in ?? ()
> (gdb)
>
> is this use
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:38:14 +0100
Philipp Kern wrote:
> I think you want to type in "run" first before doing "where", as gdb
> will by default only load the binary into memory but not execute it.
yes, you are right, thanks.
i run it and the output was:
uov...@flatline:~$ gdb --args /usr/lib/gh
Andrea,
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 03:37:46PM +0100, Andrea Lusuardi - UoVoBW wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 15:39:20 +0200
> Kari Pahula wrote:
>
> > Let's try out some more things.
> >
> > Please try
> > gdb --args /usr/lib/ghc-6.12.1/lib/ghc -B/usr/lib/ghc-6.12.1/
> > --interactive
> >
> > and t
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 15:39:20 +0200
Kari Pahula wrote:
> Let's try out some more things.
>
> Please try
> gdb --args /usr/lib/ghc-6.12.1/lib/ghc -B/usr/lib/ghc-6.12.1/
> --interactive
>
> and type "where" when you get the segfault.
>
i think there might be something wrong wih what i am doing,
Let's try out some more things.
Please try
gdb --args /usr/lib/ghc-6.12.1/lib/ghc -B/usr/lib/ghc-6.12.1/ --interactive
and type "where" when you get the segfault.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@l
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:11:55 +0200
Kari Pahula wrote:
> I asked upstream to have a look at this.
thanks, sorry for the inconvenience.
> Do you have SElinux enabled? They said that this could be related to
> that.
no, i do not have SElinux in the kernel enabled (i have the userspace
tools but
I asked upstream to have a look at this.
Do you have SElinux enabled? They said that this could be related to
that.
Also, could you run strace -f ghci and get a gdb stack trace of the
bug?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Tr
Even more information, i just noticed the line _above_ the one of the
segmentation fault:
flatline kernel: show_signal_msg: 94 callbacks suppressed
It has the very same timestamp of the segfault message, might the two
things be related? i will try to convince rsyslogd not to suppress the
message
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:19:51 +0200
Kari Pahula wrote:
> Sorry about deferring replying to this. I was busy getting 6.12.1
> packaged and didn't want to consider problems with 6.10 too much
> before getting that done.
no problem at all, i used the precompiled version from the website in
the mean
Sorry about deferring replying to this. I was busy getting 6.12.1
packaged and didn't want to consider problems with 6.10 too much
before getting that done.
I still run i386 system on my computer and ghci has worked for me all
the time. I'm not sure why it doesn't for you. I'm sure that I would
15 matches
Mail list logo
