Leann Ogasawara wrote:
> Sim, since you are the original bug reporter, care to comment if this is
> now resolved for you as well? Thanks.
>
> ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
>Status: Confirmed => Incomplete
>
I have not had a recurrence on any of my equipment (of the order of 25
servers),
Dave Hart wrote:
> This bug report was refiled in the NTP bug database nearly verbatim as
> bug #1071, which was just resolved with a bounds-check. If you have
> cacert.org's root certificate loaded in your browser, or are willing to
> click past possibly dire warnings about an invalid certificate
I've seen a very similar bug with a debian testing 2.6.24-1-686 kernel,
which will be very closely related to the ubuntu 8.04 one
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=490156#2).
I've had it twice on two different but identical chassis - Viglen
branded Intel chassis with Intel Server
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: ntp
$ uname -a
Linux x 2.6.24-17-generic #1 SMP Thu May 1 13:57:17 UTC 2008 x86_64
GNU/Linux
$ lsb_release -rd
Description:Ubuntu 8.04
Release:8.04
$ apt-cache policy ntp
ntp:
Installed: 1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-3ubuntu2
Candidate: 1:4.2.4p4+
** Attachment added: "full transcript of my tests"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/14796616/ntp_bugreport_v2.txt
--
Segmentation fault in ntpd when system has more than 1134 interface addresses
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/235793
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
I've seen a very similar bug with a debian testing 2.6.24-1-686 kernel,
which will be very closely related to the ubuntu 8.04 one
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=490156#2).
I've had it twice on two different but identical chassis - Viglen
branded Intel chassis with Intel Server
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: ntp
$ uname -a
Linux x 2.6.24-17-generic #1 SMP Thu May 1 13:57:17 UTC 2008 x86_64
GNU/Linux
$ lsb_release -rd
Description:Ubuntu 8.04
Release:8.04
$ apt-cache policy ntp
ntp:
Installed: 1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-3ubuntu2
Candidate: 1:4.2.4p4+
** Attachment added: "full transcript of my tests"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/14796616/ntp_bugreport_v2.txt
--
Segmentation fault in ntpd when system has more than 1134 interface addresses
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/235793
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Dave Hart wrote:
> This bug report was refiled in the NTP bug database nearly verbatim as
> bug #1071, which was just resolved with a bounds-check. If you have
> cacert.org's root certificate loaded in your browser, or are willing to
> click past possibly dire warnings about an invalid certificate
Leann Ogasawara wrote:
> Sim, since you are the original bug reporter, care to comment if this is
> now resolved for you as well? Thanks.
>
> ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
>Status: Confirmed => Incomplete
>
I have not had a recurrence on any of my equipment (of the order of 25
servers),
Dave Hart wrote:
> This bug report was refiled in the NTP bug database nearly verbatim as
> bug #1071, which was just resolved with a bounds-check. If you have
> cacert.org's root certificate loaded in your browser, or are willing to
> click past possibly dire warnings about an invalid certificate
Leann Ogasawara wrote:
> Sim, since you are the original bug reporter, care to comment if this is
> now resolved for you as well? Thanks.
>
> ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
>Status: Confirmed => Incomplete
>
I have not had a recurrence on any of my equipment (of the order of 25
servers),
I've seen a very similar bug with a debian testing 2.6.24-1-686 kernel,
which will be very closely related to the ubuntu 8.04 one
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=490156#2).
I've had it twice on two different but identical chassis - Viglen
branded Intel chassis with Intel Server
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: ntp
$ uname -a
Linux x 2.6.24-17-generic #1 SMP Thu May 1 13:57:17 UTC 2008 x86_64
GNU/Linux
$ lsb_release -rd
Description:Ubuntu 8.04
Release:8.04
$ apt-cache policy ntp
ntp:
Installed: 1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-3ubuntu2
Candidate: 1:4.2.4p4+
** Attachment added: "full transcript of my tests"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/14796616/ntp_bugreport_v2.txt
--
Segmentation fault in ntpd when system has more than 1134 interface addresses
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/235793
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
I've seen a very similar bug with a debian testing 2.6.24-1-686 kernel,
which will be very closely related to the ubuntu 8.04 one
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=490156#2).
I've had it twice on two different but identical chassis - Viglen
branded Intel chassis with Intel Server
I've seen a very similar bug with a debian testing 2.6.24-1-686 kernel,
which will be very closely related to the ubuntu 8.04 one
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=490156#2).
I've had it twice on two different but identical chassis - Viglen
branded Intel chassis with Intel Server
Leann Ogasawara wrote:
> Sim, since you are the original bug reporter, care to comment if this is
> now resolved for you as well? Thanks.
>
> ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
>Status: Confirmed => Incomplete
>
I have not had a recurrence on any of my equipment (of the order of 25
servers),
I've seen a very similar bug with a debian testing 2.6.24-1-686 kernel,
which will be very closely related to the ubuntu 8.04 one
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=490156#2).
I've had it twice on two different but identical chassis - Viglen
branded Intel chassis with Intel Server
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: ntp
$ uname -a
Linux x 2.6.24-17-generic #1 SMP Thu May 1 13:57:17 UTC 2008 x86_64
GNU/Linux
$ lsb_release -rd
Description:Ubuntu 8.04
Release:8.04
$ apt-cache policy ntp
ntp:
Installed: 1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-3ubuntu2
Candidate: 1:4.2.4p4+
** Attachment added: "full transcript of my tests"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/14796616/ntp_bugreport_v2.txt
--
Segmentation fault in ntpd when system has more than 1134 interface addresses
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/235793
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: ntp
$ uname -a
Linux x 2.6.24-17-generic #1 SMP Thu May 1 13:57:17 UTC 2008 x86_64
GNU/Linux
$ lsb_release -rd
Description:Ubuntu 8.04
Release:8.04
$ apt-cache policy ntp
ntp:
Installed: 1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-3ubuntu2
Candidate: 1:4.2.4p4+
** Attachment added: "full transcript of my tests"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/14796616/ntp_bugreport_v2.txt
--
Segmentation fault in ntpd when system has more than 1134 interface addresses
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/235793
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Dave Hart wrote:
> This bug report was refiled in the NTP bug database nearly verbatim as
> bug #1071, which was just resolved with a bounds-check. If you have
> cacert.org's root certificate loaded in your browser, or are willing to
> click past possibly dire warnings about an invalid certificate
Dave Hart wrote:
> This bug report was refiled in the NTP bug database nearly verbatim as
> bug #1071, which was just resolved with a bounds-check. If you have
> cacert.org's root certificate loaded in your browser, or are willing to
> click past possibly dire warnings about an invalid certificate
Leann Ogasawara wrote:
> Sim, since you are the original bug reporter, care to comment if this is
> now resolved for you as well? Thanks.
>
> ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
>Status: Confirmed => Incomplete
>
I have not had a recurrence on any of my equipment (of the order of 25
servers),
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: ntp
$ uname -a
Linux x 2.6.24-17-generic #1 SMP Thu May 1 13:57:17 UTC 2008 x86_64
GNU/Linux
$ lsb_release -rd
Description:Ubuntu 8.04
Release:8.04
$ apt-cache policy ntp
ntp:
Installed: 1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-3ubuntu2
Candidate: 1:4.2.4p4+
** Attachment added: "full transcript of my tests"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/14796616/ntp_bugreport_v2.txt
--
Segmentation fault in ntpd when system has more than 1134 interface addresses
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/235793
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Dave Hart wrote:
> This bug report was refiled in the NTP bug database nearly verbatim as
> bug #1071, which was just resolved with a bounds-check. If you have
> cacert.org's root certificate loaded in your browser, or are willing to
> click past possibly dire warnings about an invalid certificate
Leann Ogasawara wrote:
> Sim, since you are the original bug reporter, care to comment if this is
> now resolved for you as well? Thanks.
>
> ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
>Status: Confirmed => Incomplete
>
I have not had a recurrence on any of my equipment (of the order of 25
servers),
30 matches
Mail list logo
