Your message dated 02 Nov 2003 10:40:49 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#218566: Is it a bad RAM?
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 09:07:55 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Nov 01 03:07:52 2003
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from smtp2.actcom.co.il [192.114.47.15]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1AFrjZ-0005mV-00; Sat, 01 Nov 2003 03:07:50 -0600
Received: from rakefet (line105-152.adsl.actcom.co.il [192.117.105.152])
by smtp2.actcom.co.il (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id hA197lNU011437
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO)
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 1 Nov 2003 11:07:48 +0200
Received: from shaul by rakefet with local (Exim 4.22)
id 1AFrjW-0002o3-V0
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sat, 01 Nov 2003 11:07:46 +0200
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 11:07:46 +0200
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Compilation fails: Can you help with submitting a gcc bug?
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
From: Shaul Karl <[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_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: kernel-source-2.6.0-test9
Version: 2.6.0-test9-1
Severity: important
Justification: fails to build from source
There is a compiler problem when compiling net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.o.
What other information can you suggests before submitting a gcc bug? The
URL that is mentioned further below also mentions
* the complete command line that triggers the bug; and
* the preprocessed file (*.i*) that triggers the bug, generated
* by adding -save-temps to the complete compilation command, or, in the
case of a bug report for the GNAT front end, a complete set of
source files (see below).
However I don't know how to obtain it. I used fakeroot -- make-kpkg.
Here is what I can see:
include/net/inetpeer.h: In function `inet_getid':
include/net/inetpeer.h:65: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
make[3]: *** [net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** [net/ipv4] Error 2
make[1]: *** [net] Error 2
make: *** [stamp-build] Error 2
$ gcc -v
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i486-linux/3.3.2/specs
Configured with: ../src/configure -v
--enable-languages=c,c++,java,f77,pascal,objc,ada,treelang --prefix=/usr
--mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info
--with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/3.3 --enable-shared
--with-system-zlib --enable-nls --without-included-gettext
--enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-debug
--enable-java-gc=boehm --enable-java-awt=xlib --enable-objc-gc
i486-linux
Thread model: posix
gcc version 3.3.2 (Debian)
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux sitvanit 2.6.0-test2.custom586.1 #1 Wed Aug 20 16:10:09 IDT 2003
i586
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Versions of packages kernel-source-2.6.0-test9 depends on:
ii binutils 2.14.90.0.6-5 The GNU assembler, linker and bina
ii bzip2 1.0.2-1 A high-quality block-sorting file
ii coreutils [fileutils] 5.0-5 The GNU core utilities
-- no debconf information
--
Shaul Karl, shaulk @ actcom . net . il
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 218566-done) by bugs.debian.org; 2 Nov 2003 09:40:58 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Nov 02 03:40:55 2003
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mx3.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de [134.2.12.26]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1AGEj6-00039q-00; Sun, 02 Nov 2003 03:40:52 -0600
Received: from juist (semeai [134.2.15.66])
by mx3.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 010B0149
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 2 Nov 2003 10:40:50 +0100 (NFT)
Received: from falk by juist with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 1AGEj3-0000AT-00
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 02 Nov 2003 10:40:49 +0100
X-Face: "iUeUu$b*W_"w?tV83Y3*r:`rh&dRv}$YnZ3,LVeCZSYVuf[Gpo*5%_=/\_!gc_,SS}[~xZ
wY77I-M)xHIx:2f56g%/`SOw"Dx%4Xq0&f\Tj~>|QR|vGlU}TBYhiG(K:2<T^
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug#218566: Is it a bad RAM?
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Falk Hueffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 02 Nov 2003 10:40:49 +0100
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Lines: 24
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.5 (cabbage)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.7 required=4.0
tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT
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)
Shaul Karl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> With my 2nd attempt to make-kpkg of the same source, I got
>
> include/asm/io.h: In function `outl_local':
> include/asm/io.h:373: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
> Please submit a full bug report,
> with preprocessed source if appropriate.
> See <URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
> make[3]: *** [sound/core/sgbuf.o] Error 1
> make[2]: *** [sound/core] Error 2
> make[1]: *** [sound] Error 2
> make: *** [stamp-build] Error 2
>
> sound/core/sgbuf.o was compiled after net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.o, and
> tcp_minisocks.o had no issues this time.
>
> Bad RAM after all?
Very likely. Unless you have a reproducible failure, there's nothing
we can do.
--
Falk
