From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 27 13:22:12 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B6ABA38; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 13:22:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hades.sorbs.net (hades.sorbs.net [67.231.146.201]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1E8B2BD1; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 13:22:11 +0000 (UTC) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from isux.com (firewall.isux.com [213.165.190.213]) by hades.sorbs.net (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.29.0 64bit (built Jul 9 2013)) with ESMTPSA id <0N9D00L5EHAZC900@hades.sorbs.net>; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 06:25:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: <53D4FD00.9050204@sorbs.net> Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 15:22:08 +0200 From: Michelle Sullivan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100301 SeaMonkey/1.1.19 To: David Wolfskill Subject: Re: PKG 3.1.0 update - Segmentation fault: 11 References: <53D4CE4A.3040208@webrz.net> <20140727111949.GH50802@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20140727123035.GR34525@albert.catwhisker.org> <53D4F2CF.4040501@sorbs.net> <20140727125528.GS34525@albert.catwhisker.org> In-reply-to: <20140727125528.GS34525@albert.catwhisker.org> Cc: Baptiste Daroussin , FreeBSD Ports ML X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 13:22:12 -0000 David Wolfskill wrote: > On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 02:38:39PM +0200, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > >> ... >> By any chance is there a core file around releated to this, and if so >> was the binary that faulted unstripped? >> > > In each of the 3 cases, I find a > /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg/pkg-static.core file > > g1-252(9.3-S)[4] sudo file pkg-static.core > Password: > pkg-static.core: ELF 32-bit LSB core file Intel 80386, version 1 (FreeBSD), FreeBSD-style, from '-static' > g1-252(9.3-S)[5] > Doesn't appear stripped.. > >> I'd be interested in seeing the backtrace... >> > > Well, given it was a segmentation fault, it's not clear to me that > I'd be able to find much of value -- I'm way out of practice using > gdb, and by the nature of a segmentation fault (or what caused it, > anyway), something is pretty confused by the time the fault is > discovered. > Unless the fault smashed the stack often you can find what the problem/cause was. If the stack is smashed you're screwed. gdb Commands immediately useful: backtrace full (alias: bt full) frame for which you want to examine if you get a line number/code, 'l' (el) will give the 5 lines eitherside If threaded select each thread before the frame to see what was happening in each thread. If I remember correctly - it's been several years since I last used gdb ;-) If you want to catch a smashed stack problem run the binary in gdb: gdb Then: set args run When it faults most of the time you'll get the stack just prior to the smashing - though I have had some really bad ones when even gdb cored out.. If the process forks out, you will need to use follow-fork.. Regards, Michelle >> (I'm not using 1.3 or even NG on any of my production >> systems at the moment because I personally don't trust it yet (I have 57 >> complex systems and if they screw up I end up rebuilding the OS from >> scratch) so I'd be happy to take a look at any cores an unstripped >> binaries to see if I can work out why people see this occasionally... >> Sounds like you have 3 identical systems which 2 worked no problems the >> third faulted .. this is obviously not good and needs to be fixed, so >> will give another pair of eyes at the problem. >> > > Err... no.... I have 5 system in total; 2 haven't failed because > I haven't tried to update them yet: if they fail, I don't have > access to email (or much of anything else); more critially, neither > does my spouse -- and I value domestic tranquility. > Ahh - so all 3 failed, the other 2 have not been tried? > Of the 3 failures, 2 were on i386; one on amd64. > > They are all running stable/9 @r269090 (and the 2 that I haven't > upgraded yet would normally be upgraded to that point before I start > messing with ports on them). > > I'll be happy to provide any information about this that I can. > Regards, Michelle -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/