triage February 2011

triage@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
41 discussions

[Bug 483777] New: lot of undefined-non-weak-symbol with festival
by Red Hat Bugzilla 14 Mar '11

14 Mar '11

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: lot of undefined-non-weak-symbol with festival https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483777 Summary: lot of undefined-non-weak-symbol with festival Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: FutureFeature Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: festival AssignedTo: davidz(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: kwizart(a)gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: mattdm(a)mattdm.org, skasal(a)redhat.com, thomas.moschny(a)gmx.de, tim(a)niemueller.de, mclasen(a)redhat.com, davidz(a)redhat.com, kwizart(a)gmail.com, robert.zhangle(a)gmail.com, fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com, schiffer(a)cs.rwth-aachen.de Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Clone Of: 242607 Created an attachment (id=330741) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=330741) rpmlint on installed festival package +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #242607 +++ --- Additional comment from kwizart(a)gmail.com on 2009-01-22 11:53:33 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329721) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329721) undefined-non-weak-symbol_festival-lib-1.96-7.fc10.x86_64.log There are lot of undefined-non-weak-symbol_festival in the festival-lib-1.96-7.fc10 package (running rpmlint fastival-lib on installed package). Theses symbols should be added at link time and could be the reason of runtime failures when the needed libraries aren't present at runtime. It will also prevents the linker to preload suches libraries which will degrade performances when loading. (since every symbol will be revolved at runtime). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 8

[Bug 658851] New: _dl_debug_state() RT_CONSISTENT called too early
by Red Hat Bugzilla 14 Mar '11

14 Mar '11

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: _dl_debug_state() RT_CONSISTENT called too early https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=658851 Summary: _dl_debug_state() RT_CONSISTENT called too early Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Version: 5.5 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Status Whiteboard: bzcl34nup Keywords: Reopened Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: glibc AssignedTo: schwab(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: spoyarek(a)redhat.com QAContact: qe-baseos-apps(a)redhat.com CC: mattdm(a)mattdm.org, jreiser(a)bitwagon.com, drepper.fsp(a)gmail.com, jakub(a)redhat.com, tromey(a)redhat.com, tmraz(a)redhat.com, sundaram(a)redhat.com, jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com, fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com, ppluzhnikov(a)google.com, masao-takahashi(a)kanno.co.jp Depends on: 179072 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Red Hat Target Release: --- Clone Of: 179072 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #179072 +++ >From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050922 Fedora/1.0.7-1.1.fc4 Firefox/1.0.7 Description of problem: dl_open_worker() in elf/dl-open.c calls _dl_debug_state() with .r_state==RT_CONSISTENT even though relocations have not yet been performed on newly-loaded objects. A debugger that is observing _dl_debug_state() would like to see the relocations the same way that any newly-loaded code will see them. The time to call _dl_debug_state() is just before running the initializer functions of the newly-loaded objects. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): glibc-2.3.90-30 How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Look in elf/dl-open.c:158, function dl_open_worker(). 2. 3. Actual Results: The call to _dl_debug_state() is on line 328, the relocations are performed just after that, and the call to _dl_init() is on line 470. Expected Results: The call to _dl_debug_state() should be just before the call to _dl_init(). Additional info: Suggested patch will be attached. --- Additional comment from jreiser(a)bitwagon.com on 2006-01-26 18:41:13 EST --- Created attachment 123756 patch to call _dl_debug_state just before _dl_init in dl_open_worker --- Additional comment from jreiser(a)bitwagon.com on 2006-02-04 17:30:28 EST --- Here is a testcase which shows that gdb runs into trouble when relocations are not performed before ld-linux calls _dl_debug_state() with RT_CONSISTENT. $ cat my_lib.c #include <stdio.h> int sub1(int x) { printf("sub1 %d\n", x); } $ cat my_main.c #include <dlfcn.h> int main() { void *handle = dlopen("./my_lib.so", RTLD_LAZY); void (*sub1)(int) = (void (*)(int))dlsym(handle, "sub1"); sub1(6); return 0; } $ gcc -o my_lib.so -shared -fPIC -g my_lib.c $ gcc -o my_main -g my_main.c -ldl $ gdb my_main GNU gdb Red Hat Linux (6.3.0.0-1.98rh) (gdb) set stop-on-solib-events 1 ## sets a breakpoint on _dl_debug_state() (gdb) run Starting program: /home/jreiser/my_main Reading symbols from shared object read from target memory...done. Loaded system supplied DSO at 0xc3c000 Stopped due to shared library event (gdb) info shared ## which modules are in memory now? >From To Syms Read Shared Object Library 0x006087f0 0x0061d15f Yes /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (gdb) c Continuing. Stopped due to shared library event (gdb) info shared >From To Syms Read Shared Object Library 0x006087f0 0x0061d15f Yes /lib/ld-linux.so.2 0x00777c00 0x00778a8c Yes /lib/libdl.so.2 0x0063a590 0x00727368 Yes /lib/libc.so.6 (gdb) c Continuing. Stopped due to shared library event (gdb) info shared >From To Syms Read Shared Object Library 0x006087f0 0x0061d15f Yes /lib/ld-linux.so.2 0x00777c00 0x00778a8c Yes /lib/libdl.so.2 0x0063a590 0x00727368 Yes /lib/libc.so.6 (gdb) c Continuing. Stopped due to shared library event (gdb) info shared >From To Syms Read Shared Object Library 0x006087f0 0x0061d15f Yes /lib/ld-linux.so.2 0x00777c00 0x00778a8c Yes /lib/libdl.so.2 0x0063a590 0x00727368 Yes /lib/libc.so.6 0x00dcc41c 0x00dcc53c Yes ./my_lib.so ## Now my_lib.so is loaded, and gdb believes that everything is ready to run. ## However, ld-linux has not performed relocations on my_lib.so, ## so there will be a SIGSEGV when the user calls sub1 in my_lib.so. (gdb) print sub1(42) Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x000003f2 in ?? () The program being debugged was signaled while in a function called from GDB. GDB remains in the frame where the signal was received. To change this behavior use "set unwindonsignal on" Evaluation of the expression containing the function (sub1) will be abandoned. (gdb) x/i $pc ## where was execution at time of SIGSEGV? 0x3f2: Cannot access memory at address 0x3f2 (gdb) x/12i sub1 0xdcc4d8 <sub1>: push %ebp 0xdcc4d9 <sub1+1>: mov %esp,%ebp 0xdcc4db <sub1+3>: push %ebx 0xdcc4dc <sub1+4>: sub $0x14,%esp 0xdcc4df <sub1+7>: call 0xdcc4d4 <__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx> 0xdcc4e4 <sub1+12>: add $0x1164,%ebx 0xdcc4ea <sub1+18>: mov 0x8(%ebp),%eax 0xdcc4ed <sub1+21>: mov %eax,0x4(%esp) 0xdcc4f1 <sub1+25>: lea 0xffffef10(%ebx),%eax 0xdcc4f7 <sub1+31>: mov %eax,(%esp) 0xdcc4fa <sub1+34>: call 0xdcc3ec ## printf@PLT 0xdcc4ff <sub1+39>: add $0x14,%esp (gdb) x/i 0xdcc3ec ## printf@PLT 0xdcc3ec: jmp *0xc(%ebx) (gdb) x/x 0xdcc4e4+0x1164+0xc 0xdcd654: 0x000003f2 ## unrelocated (gdb) q Because ld-linux did not perform relocations before calling _dl_debug_state, then gdb was presented with inconsistent state. If ld-linux calls _dl_debug_state after performing relocations, and just before calling _dl_init, then gdb will see a sane world, and the user's request "print sub1(42)" will execute correctly without SIGSEGV. --- Additional comment from sundaram(a)redhat.com on 2006-02-20 05:46:55 EST --- These bugs are being closed since a large number of updates have been released after the FC5 test1 and test2 releases. Kindly update your system by running yum update as root user or try out the third and final test version of FC5 being released in a short while and verify if the bugs are still present on the system .Reopen or file new bug reports as appropriate after confirming the presence of this issue. Thanks --- Additional comment from drepper.fsp(a)gmail.com on 2006-05-07 21:36:56 EDT --- I changed the wrong bug. --- Additional comment from mattdm(a)mattdm.org on 2007-04-06 12:26:15 EDT --- Fedora Core 5 and Fedora Core 6 are, as we're sure you've noticed, no longer test releases. We're cleaning up the bug database and making sure important bug reports filed against these test releases don't get lost. It would be helpful if you could test this issue with a released version of Fedora or with the latest development / test release. Thanks for your help and for your patience. [This is a bulk message for all open FC5/FC6 test release bugs. I'm adding myself to the CC list for each bug, so I'll see any comments you make after this and do my best to make sure every issue gets proper attention.] --- Additional comment from jreiser(a)bitwagon.com on 2007-04-07 17:22:46 EDT --- This bug still exists in glibc-2.5.90-17 for fc7t2. The testcase of comment #2 still demonstrates the problem. The specific addresses involved are: ----- (gdb) print sub1(42) Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x000002ea in ?? () The program being debugged was signaled while in a function called from GDB. GDB remains in the frame where the signal was received. To change this behavior use "set unwindonsignal on" Evaluation of the expression containing the function (sub1) will be abandoned. (gdb) x/i $pc 0x2ea: Cannot access memory at address 0x2ea (gdb) x/12i sub1 0xb373dc <sub1>: push %ebp 0xb373dd <sub1+1>: mov %esp,%ebp 0xb373df <sub1+3>: push %ebx 0xb373e0 <sub1+4>: sub $0x14,%esp 0xb373e3 <sub1+7>: call 0xb373d7 <__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx> 0xb373e8 <sub1+12>: add $0x116c,%ebx 0xb373ee <sub1+18>: mov 0x8(%ebp),%eax 0xb373f1 <sub1+21>: mov %eax,0x4(%esp) 0xb373f5 <sub1+25>: lea 0xffffef0c(%ebx),%eax 0xb373fb <sub1+31>: mov %eax,(%esp) 0xb373fe <sub1+34>: call 0xb372e4 <printf@plt> 0xb37403 <sub1+39>: add $0x14,%esp (gdb) x/i 0xb372e4 0xb372e4 <printf@plt>: jmp *0x10(%ebx) (gdb) x/x 0xb373e8+0x116c+0x10 0xb38564: 0x000002ea ----- I change the Version field of this bugreport to devel. --- Additional comment from mattdm(a)mattdm.org on 2007-04-08 14:27:27 EDT --- Thanks. --- Additional comment from fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com on 2008-04-03 12:49:36 EDT --- Based on the date this bug was created, it appears to have been reported against rawhide during the development of a Fedora release that is no longer maintained. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer maintained. If this bug remains in NEEDINFO thirty (30) days from now, we will automatically close it. If you can reproduce this bug in a maintained Fedora version (7, 8, or rawhide), please change this bug to the respective version and change the status to ASSIGNED. (If you're unable to change the bug's version or status, add a comment to the bug and someone will change it for you.) Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled these issues to this point. The process we're following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again. --- Additional comment from jreiser(a)bitwagon.com on 2008-04-04 22:57:41 EDT --- The problem persists in Fedora 9 Beta rawhide glibc-2.7.90-9.i686. Following comment #6 above, the specific displacements in 2.7.90-9 are: ----- (gdb) info shared >From To Syms Read Shared Object Library 0x00ba1830 0x00bb9c1f Yes /lib/ld-linux.so.2 0x00d61aa0 0x00d62aa8 Yes /lib/libdl.so.2 0x00bda3e0 0x00ce9a38 Yes /lib/libc.so.6 0x00111360 0x00111488 Yes ./my_lib.so (gdb) print sub1(42) Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x0000033e in ?? () The program being debugged was signaled while in a function called from GDB. GDB remains in the frame where the signal was received. To change this behavior use "set unwindonsignal on" Evaluation of the expression containing the function (sub1) will be abandoned. (gdb) x/i $pc 0x33e: Cannot access memory at address 0x33e (gdb) x/12i sub1 0x11141c <sub1>: push %ebp 0x11141d <sub1+1>: mov %esp,%ebp 0x11141f <sub1+3>: push %ebx 0x111420 <sub1+4>: sub $0x14,%esp 0x111423 <sub1+7>: call 0x111417 <__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx> 0x111428 <sub1+12>: add $0x1170,%ebx 0x11142e <sub1+18>: mov 0x8(%ebp),%eax 0x111431 <sub1+21>: mov %eax,0x4(%esp) 0x111435 <sub1+25>: lea -0x10f4(%ebx),%eax 0x11143b <sub1+31>: mov %eax,(%esp) 0x11143e <sub1+34>: call 0x111338 <printf@plt> 0x111443 <sub1+39>: add $0x14,%esp (gdb) x/i 0x111338 0x111338 <printf@plt>: jmp *0x10(%ebx) (gdb) x/x 0x111428+0x1170+0x10 0x1125a8: 0x0000033e ----- --- Additional comment from fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com on 2008-05-13 22:04:49 EDT --- Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping --- Additional comment from ppluzhnikov(a)google.com on 2008-11-01 17:53:29 EDT --- Problem persists in current Fedora 9 (glibc-2.8-8.i686), and also shows up as failure of GDB to debug programs which dynamically load libpthread.so.0. Full details here: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2008-11/msg00004.html --- Additional comment from jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com on 2008-11-12 17:38:41 EST --- Created attachment 323394 Minimized to only move _dl_debug_state() after relocations, for glibc-2.8.90-16. (In reply to comment #0) > The time to call _dl_debug_state() is just before running the initializer > functions of the newly-loaded objects. _dl_debug_state() call be probably called at three places: (A) r_map is already correct (guaranteed by RT_CONSISTENT); current version. (B) Like (A) but also after the relocations are resolved. (C) Like (B) but also after the initializers are executed. I believe the call+RT_CONSISTENT was intended for (A) and neither (B) nor (C). (C) is probably too late because we would not be able to debug initializers. But still nobody guarantees we should stop at (B) instead of at current (A). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ GDB currently assumes that at _dl_debug_state() time if the `nptl_version', `_thread_db_*' and other symbols are present libthread_db can be used. This is currently not true as it fails at least while reading libpthread unrelocated symbol `stack_used': glibc-20081031T2102/nptl/allocatestack.c: static LIST_HEAD (stack_used); File: /lib64/libpthread.so.0 Symbol table '.symtab' contains 907 entries: Num: Value Size Type Bind Vis Ndx Name 61: 0000000000217220 16 OBJECT LOCAL DEFAULT 28 stack_used Relocation section '.rela.dyn' at offset 0x41a8 contains 68 entries: Offset Info Type Sym. Value Sym. Name + Addend 000000217220 000000000008 R_X86_64_RELATIVE 0000000000217220 No other _dl_debug_state() call is done at a later time so the debugger cannot start tracking the threads. The only possibility is to delay libthread_db initialization by placing a breakpoint at the _dl_debug_state() notification time to the function found for DT_INIT. While I implemented the attached GDB patch and so I do not try to avoid this place for the fix I do not find it as the right solution. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Another possibility is to fix libpthread data structures to be fully PIC and so understandable by libthread_db at the current _dl_debug_state() point (A). It seems libthread_db can already parse libpthread at (B) time still before its __pthread_initialize_minimal() is called from DT_INIT. I find it also as a real possibility how to fix glibc libthread_db. Still I do not see there a regression risk to delay _dl_debug_state() after relocations resolving; there is nothing more useful on an unrelocated library. (STT_IFUNC code - called code returning a value for relocations - would be a bit harder to debug but only for resolving with RTLD_NOW - not a problem.) Adjusted the patch for glibc-2.8.90-16 making it a minimal working change. --- Additional comment from jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com on 2008-11-12 17:40:14 EST --- Created attachment 323395 Two testcases (not suitable for the glibc testsuite). Testcase for the problem with libpthread loaded first only on dlopen(). Prerequisite is to run: prelink -uf /lib64/libpthread.so.0 GDB was tested gdb-6.8-1.fc9 up to GDB CVS HEAD snapshot. $ gdb ./testload ... (gdb) r Starting program: /tmp/rh179072/testload [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] Error while reading shared library symbols: Cannot find new threads: generic error Cannot find new threads: generic error (gdb) _ Testcase that the patched library and/or patched GDB fixes the threads problem: $ gdb ./testload ... (gdb) r Starting program: /tmp/rh179072/testload [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] [New Thread 0x7ffff7fde6f0 (LWP 7018)] [New Thread 0x7ffff7bc0950 (LWP 7021)] [Thread 0x7ffff7bc0950 (LWP 7021) exited] Program exited normally. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Testcase that at the (B) time (with the patch) we still cannot call safely functions as they may expect static class variables to be initialized: # class C { # int i; # C () { i = 1; } # void f () { assert (i == 1); } # }; $ gdb -x ./cxx.gdbinit ... (gdb) p c $1 = {i = 0} (gdb) p c.f $2 = {void (C *)} 0x7ffff7ddd73a <C::f()> (gdb) p c.f() cxxmain: cxxlib.C:8: void C::f(): Assertion `i == 1' failed. --- Additional comment from jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com on 2008-11-12 17:43:18 EST --- Created attachment 323396 Illustrative fix for GDB CVS HEAD not requiring fixed glibc (proof of concept). --- Additional comment from ppluzhnikov(a)google.com on 2008-11-12 18:05:03 EST --- (In reply to comment #12) > _dl_debug_state() call be probably called at three places: > (A) r_map is already correct (guaranteed by RT_CONSISTENT); current version. > (B) Like (A) but also after the relocations are resolved. > (C) Like (B) but also after the initializers are executed. > > I believe the call+RT_CONSISTENT was intended for (A) and neither (B) nor (C). What makes you believe that? I can't find official documentation for RT_CONSISTENT, but Solaris (from which this interface is copied) AFAICT calls _dl_debug_state() (or rather its Solaris equivalent) at (B): http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/cmd/sgs/rtld/… --- Additional comment from jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com on 2008-11-12 18:16:36 EST --- I also could not find any documentation for _dl_debug_state()/RT_CONSISTENT, My text tries to advice (B) as the best choice out of the existing possibilities and thanks to finding out the Solaris code supports that. --- Additional comment from fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com on 2009-06-09 18:05:58 EDT --- This message is a reminder that Fedora 9 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 9. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '9'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 9's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 9 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping --- Additional comment from jreiser(a)bitwagon.com on 2009-06-10 19:51:25 EDT --- The problem of inconsistent assumptions about the state of the memory image at the call of _dl_debug_state() [have relocations been performed or not?] persists in Fedora 11 glibc-2.10.1-2.i686. The significant details from the testcase of Comment #2 are now: ----- Stopped due to shared library event (gdb) info shared >From To Syms Read Shared Object Library 0x005e4830 0x005fd27f Yes /lib/ld-linux.so.2 0x007a6a60 0x007a7a68 Yes /lib/libdl.so.2 0x0061e840 0x0072ca78 Yes /lib/libc.so.6 0x004c9380 0x004c94a8 Yes ./my_lib.so (gdb) print sub1(42) Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x0000035e in ?? () The program being debugged was signaled while in a function called from GDB. GDB remains in the frame where the signal was received. To change this behavior use "set unwindonsignal on". Evaluation of the expression containing the function (sub1) will be abandoned. When the function is done executing, GDB will silently stop. (gdb) x/i $pc 0x35e: Cannot access memory at address 0x35e (gdb) x/12i sub1 0x4c943c <sub1>: push %ebp 0x4c943d <sub1+1>: mov %esp,%ebp 0x4c943f <sub1+3>: push %ebx 0x4c9440 <sub1+4>: sub $0x14,%esp 0x4c9443 <sub1+7>: call 0x4c9437 <__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx> 0x4c9448 <sub1+12>: add $0x11b8,%ebx 0x4c944e <sub1+18>: lea -0x113c(%ebx),%eax 0x4c9454 <sub1+24>: mov 0x8(%ebp),%edx 0x4c9457 <sub1+27>: mov %edx,0x4(%esp) 0x4c945b <sub1+31>: mov %eax,(%esp) 0x4c945e <sub1+34>: call 0x4c9358 <printf@plt> 0x4c9463 <sub1+39>: add $0x14,%esp (gdb) x/i 0x4c9358 0x4c9358 <printf@plt>: jmp *0x10(%ebx) (gdb) x/x 0x4c9448+0x11b8+0x10 0x4ca610 <__cxa_finalize+4776>: 0x0000035e ----- --- Additional comment from fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com on 2010-04-27 07:38:32 EDT --- This message is a reminder that Fedora 11 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 11. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '11'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 11's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 11 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping --- Additional comment from jreiser(a)bitwagon.com on 2010-04-27 11:45:19 EDT --- This bug still is present in Fedora 13, glibc-2.11.90-20; I am changing Version of this bug to 13. Here is the session of Comment #2 on x86_64: (gdb) set stop-on-solib-events 1 (gdb) run Starting program: /home/jreiser/179072/my_main Stopped due to shared library event (gdb) info shared >From To Syms Read Shared Object Library 0x0000003712e00af0 0x0000003712e198e4 Yes /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (gdb) c Continuing. Stopped due to shared library event (gdb) info shared >From To Syms Read Shared Object Library 0x0000003712e00af0 0x0000003712e198e4 Yes /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 0x0000003713e00de0 0x0000003713e01998 Yes /lib64/libdl.so.2 0x000000371321e9a0 0x000000371332f620 Yes /lib64/libc.so.6 (gdb) c Continuing. Stopped due to shared library event (gdb) info shared >From To Syms Read Shared Object Library 0x0000003712e00af0 0x0000003712e198e4 Yes /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 0x0000003713e00de0 0x0000003713e01998 Yes /lib64/libdl.so.2 0x000000371321e9a0 0x000000371332f620 Yes /lib64/libc.so.6 (gdb) c Continuing. Stopped due to shared library event (gdb) info shared >From To Syms Read Shared Object Library 0x0000003712e00af0 0x0000003712e198e4 Yes /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 0x0000003713e00de0 0x0000003713e01998 Yes /lib64/libdl.so.2 0x000000371321e9a0 0x000000371332f620 Yes /lib64/libc.so.6 0x00007ffff7de84b0 0x00007ffff7de85e8 Yes ./my_lib.so (gdb) print sub1(42) Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x000000000000048e in ?? () The program being debugged was signaled while in a function called from GDB. GDB remains in the frame where the signal was received. To change this behavior use "set unwindonsignal on". Evaluation of the expression containing the function (sub1) will be abandoned. When the function is done executing, GDB will silently stop. (gdb) x/i $pc => 0x48e: Cannot access memory at address 0x48e (gdb) x/12i sub1 0x7ffff7de857c <sub1>: push %rbp 0x7ffff7de857d <sub1+1>: mov %rsp,%rbp 0x7ffff7de8580 <sub1+4>: sub $0x10,%rsp 0x7ffff7de8584 <sub1+8>: mov %edi,-0x4(%rbp) 0x7ffff7de8587 <sub1+11>: lea 0x68(%rip),%rax # 0x7ffff7de85f6 0x7ffff7de858e <sub1+18>: mov -0x4(%rbp),%edx 0x7ffff7de8591 <sub1+21>: mov %edx,%esi 0x7ffff7de8593 <sub1+23>: mov %rax,%rdi 0x7ffff7de8596 <sub1+26>: mov $0x0,%eax 0x7ffff7de859b <sub1+31>: callq 0x7ffff7de8488 <printf@plt> 0x7ffff7de85a0 <sub1+36>: leaveq 0x7ffff7de85a1 <sub1+37>: retq (gdb) x/i 0x7ffff7de8488 0x7ffff7de8488 <printf@plt>: jmpq *0x2003aa(%rip) # 0x7ffff7fe8838 (gdb) x/xg 0x7ffff7fe8838 0x7ffff7fe8838: 0x000000000000048e --- Additional comment from jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com on 2010-04-30 06:07:51 EDT --- *** Bug 587576 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 5

[Bug 207470] Need ability to handle duplicate VG names for Xen
by Red Hat Bugzilla 28 Feb '11

28 Feb '11

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=207470 Thierry Vignaud <thierry.vignaud(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |thierry.vignaud(a)gmail.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 124246] grubby fatal error: unable to find a suitable template
by Red Hat Bugzilla 25 Feb '11

25 Feb '11

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=124246 Aurelien Gouny <agouny(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |agouny(a)redhat.com --- Comment #57 from Aurelien Gouny <agouny(a)redhat.com> 2011-02-24 21:52:44 EST --- Bug is present on RHEL 6.0 as well, during kickstarting if customer rus "yum -y update" in post-scripts the new kernel package gets installed but not listed in grub.conf, same error message. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 292811] /etc/fuse.conf is ignored?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Feb '11

24 Feb '11

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=292811 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|fuse-2.8.5-4.fc14 |fuse-2.8.5-4.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 292811] /etc/fuse.conf is ignored?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Feb '11

24 Feb '11

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=292811 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2011-02-24 15:55:40 EST --- fuse-2.8.5-4.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 292811] /etc/fuse.conf is ignored?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Feb '11

24 Feb '11

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=292811 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version| |fuse-2.8.5-4.fc14 Resolution|INSUFFICIENT_DATA |ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 292811] /etc/fuse.conf is ignored?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Feb '11

24 Feb '11

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=292811 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2011-02-24 15:54:11 EST --- fuse-2.8.5-4.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 242607] Build with festival error.
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Feb '11

22 Feb '11

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=242607 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA --- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2011-02-22 13:48:51 EST --- festival-1.96-18.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update festival'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/festival-1.96-18.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 242607] Build with festival error.
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Feb '11

22 Feb '11

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=242607 --- Comment #38 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2011-02-22 08:26:31 EST --- festival-1.96-18.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/festival-1.96-18.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

triage February 2011