dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
19 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Felix Miata-3
On Intel P4 host gx280 with 2GB RAM tonight this happened about 2/3 through dnf
update on both F25 and F26 installations, F26 the latter. Last package's
scriptlet completed for udisks2. Last line before segfault is upgrading
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free. Prior to 'dnf update' on both I had run 'dnf update
dnf* rpm* glib* drac* libso* hawk* syste* fedo*. In F25 with <70 packages left
to update I rebooted and restarted dnf update only to have it eventually claim
completion without ever actually installing the kernel to /boot, though the rpm
DB claimed it was installed. I reinstalled the kernel and it runs Plasma, but I
wonder what else didn't get completely installed. Distro-sync wouldn't run due
to some missing dependant rpm I don't remember. Looking at the journal on F26
suggests that dnf may have been interrupted by some cron job, and there's this:

Jul 21 02:18:18 gx280 kernel: dnf[5909]: segfault at ae738a35 ip b573218e sp
bfe6d090 error 4 in libdb-5.3.so (deleted)[b55f2000+1d1000]
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Samuel Sieb
On 07/21/2017 12:12 AM, Felix Miata wrote:

> On Intel P4 host gx280 with 2GB RAM tonight this happened about 2/3 through dnf
> update on both F25 and F26 installations, F26 the latter. Last package's
> scriptlet completed for udisks2. Last line before segfault is upgrading
> gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free. Prior to 'dnf update' on both I had run 'dnf update
> dnf* rpm* glib* drac* libso* hawk* syste* fedo*. In F25 with <70 packages left
> to update I rebooted and restarted dnf update only to have it eventually claim
> completion without ever actually installing the kernel to /boot, though the rpm
> DB claimed it was installed. I reinstalled the kernel and it runs Plasma, but I
> wonder what else didn't get completely installed. Distro-sync wouldn't run due
> to some missing dependant rpm I don't remember. Looking at the journal on F26
> suggests that dnf may have been interrupted by some cron job, and there's this:
>
> Jul 21 02:18:18 gx280 kernel: dnf[5909]: segfault at ae738a35 ip b573218e sp
> bfe6d090 error 4 in libdb-5.3.so (deleted)[b55f2000+1d1000]

This could the libdb/glibc problem.  Try running "rm /var/lib/rpm/__*"
and then "rpm --rebuilddb" and see if that fixes it.
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Felix Miata-3
Samuel Sieb composed on 2017-07-21 08:54 (UTC-0700):

> Felix Miata wrote:

>> On Intel P4 host gx280 with 2GB RAM tonight this happened about 2/3 through dnf
>> update on both F25 and F26 installations, F26 the latter. Last package's
>> scriptlet completed for udisks2. Last line before segfault is upgrading
>> gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free. Prior to 'dnf update' on both I had run 'dnf update
>> dnf* rpm* glib* drac* libso* hawk* syste* fedo*. In F25 with <70 packages left
>> to update I rebooted and restarted dnf update only to have it eventually claim
>> completion without ever actually installing the kernel to /boot, though the rpm
>> DB claimed it was installed. I reinstalled the kernel and it runs Plasma, but I
>> wonder what else didn't get completely installed. Distro-sync wouldn't run due
>> to some missing dependant rpm I don't remember. Looking at the journal on F26
>> suggests that dnf may have been interrupted by some cron job, and there's this:

>> Jul 21 02:18:18 gx280 kernel: dnf[5909]: segfault at ae738a35 ip b573218e sp
>> bfe6d090 error 4 in libdb-5.3.so (deleted)[b55f2000+1d1000]

> This could the libdb/glibc problem.  Try running "rm /var/lib/rpm/__*"
> and then "rpm --rebuilddb" and see if that fixes it.

On F26 as soon as I sent my OP I rebooted, did dnf clean all, rpm --rebuilddb,
dnf update, dnf distro-sync, then shut down and went to bed. Distro-sync did
nothing but remove 225 packages.

I did similar with F25, but don't remember particulars other than it reacted
differently to a similar sequence of events, most of which are in my OP.
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Adam Williamson
In reply to this post by Samuel Sieb
On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 08:54 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:

> On 07/21/2017 12:12 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
> > On Intel P4 host gx280 with 2GB RAM tonight this happened about 2/3 through dnf
> > update on both F25 and F26 installations, F26 the latter. Last package's
> > scriptlet completed for udisks2. Last line before segfault is upgrading
> > gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free. Prior to 'dnf update' on both I had run 'dnf update
> > dnf* rpm* glib* drac* libso* hawk* syste* fedo*. In F25 with <70 packages left
> > to update I rebooted and restarted dnf update only to have it eventually claim
> > completion without ever actually installing the kernel to /boot, though the rpm
> > DB claimed it was installed. I reinstalled the kernel and it runs Plasma, but I
> > wonder what else didn't get completely installed. Distro-sync wouldn't run due
> > to some missing dependant rpm I don't remember. Looking at the journal on F26
> > suggests that dnf may have been interrupted by some cron job, and there's this:
> >
> > Jul 21 02:18:18 gx280 kernel: dnf[5909]: segfault at ae738a35 ip b573218e sp
> > bfe6d090 error 4 in libdb-5.3.so (deleted)[b55f2000+1d1000]
>
> This could the libdb/glibc problem.  Try running "rm /var/lib/rpm/__*"
> and then "rpm --rebuilddb" and see if that fixes it.

Note that apparently manually rebuilding the DB can result in it having
the wrong SELinux label, so you should also run this afterwards (as
root):

restorecon -RFv /var/lib/rpm
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Samuel Sieb
On 07/21/2017 12:28 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Note that apparently manually rebuilding the DB can result in it having
> the wrong SELinux label, so you should also run this afterwards (as
> root):
>
> restorecon -RFv /var/lib/rpm

Interesting, I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere else in any of the
discussions of the issue.
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Samuel Sieb
In reply to this post by Felix Miata-3
On 07/21/2017 10:16 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
> On F26 as soon as I sent my OP I rebooted, did dnf clean all, rpm --rebuilddb,
> dnf update, dnf distro-sync, then shut down and went to bed. Distro-sync did
> nothing but remove 225 packages.
>
> I did similar with F25, but don't remember particulars other than it reacted
> differently to a similar sequence of events, most of which are in my OP.

Maybe you could make it clearer what you are asking then.  The subject
is about dnf segfaulting, but it sounds now like you are asking
something else and I don't understand what it is that you are trying to
find out.
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Adam Williamson
In reply to this post by Samuel Sieb
On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 13:41 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 07/21/2017 12:28 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Note that apparently manually rebuilding the DB can result in it having
> > the wrong SELinux label, so you should also run this afterwards (as
> > root):
> >
> > restorecon -RFv /var/lib/rpm
>
> Interesting, I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere else in any of the
> discussions of the issue.

I was only informed of it a few days ago; I've been editing things
since then, but yes, it wasn't known when we wrote the original round
of blog posts etc.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Ed Greshko
On 07/22/17 05:47, Adam Williamson wrote:

> On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 13:41 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>> On 07/21/2017 12:28 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> Note that apparently manually rebuilding the DB can result in it having
>>> the wrong SELinux label, so you should also run this afterwards (as
>>> root):
>>>
>>> restorecon -RFv /var/lib/rpm
>> Interesting, I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere else in any of the
>> discussions of the issue.
> I was only informed of it a few days ago; I've been editing things
> since then, but yes, it wasn't known when we wrote the original round
> of blog posts etc.
Should that be considered a bug in rpmdb?

--
Fedora Users List - The place to go to speculate endlessly



_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

signature.asc (235 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Felix Miata-3
In reply to this post by Adam Williamson
Adam Williamson composed on 2017-07-21 12:28 (UTC-0700):

> On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 08:54 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:

>> Felix Miata wrote:
...
>> > Jul 21 02:18:18 gx280 kernel: dnf[5909]: segfault at ae738a35 ip b573218e sp
>> > bfe6d090 error 4 in libdb-5.3.so (deleted)[b55f2000+1d1000]

>> This could the libdb/glibc problem.  Try running "rm /var/lib/rpm/__*"
>> and then "rpm --rebuilddb" and see if that fixes it.

> Note that apparently manually rebuilding the DB can result in it having
> the wrong SELinux label, so you should also run this afterwards (as
> root):

> restorecon -RFv /var/lib/rpm

Even when selinux=0?
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Felix Miata-3
In reply to this post by Samuel Sieb
Samuel Sieb composed on 2017-07-21 13:43 (UTC-0700):

> Felix Miata wrote:

>> On F26 as soon as I sent my OP I rebooted, did dnf clean all, rpm --rebuilddb,
>> dnf update, dnf distro-sync, then shut down and went to bed. Distro-sync did
>> nothing but remove 225 packages.

>> I did similar with F25, but don't remember particulars other than it reacted
>> differently to a similar sequence of events, most of which are in my OP.

> Maybe you could make it clearer what you are asking then.  The subject
> is about dnf segfaulting, but it sounds now like you are asking
> something else and I don't understand what it is that you are trying to
> find out.

That anyone answered my OP at all pretty much answered my question implied, "is
this a problem familiar to anyone here"? :-)

My BRC searches have a habit of either timing out or producing mostly summaries
with what to me is incomprehensible babble, and that only after great difficulty
finding one or more Fedora versions to actually select from its endless version
select list. Once classification Fedora is selected, that select list ought to
drop precipitously below 100 to choose from.

Where does one find errata that closed bugs for yet-to-be releases refer to? e.g.
libdb: Assumes that internal condition variable layout never changes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394862

The string errata is not present on
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Project_Wiki or
https://getfedora.org/ or
http://fedoraplanet.org/
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Adam Williamson
In reply to this post by Felix Miata-3
On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 20:16 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

> Adam Williamson composed on 2017-07-21 12:28 (UTC-0700):
>
> > On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 08:54 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> > > Felix Miata wrote:
>
> ...
> > > > Jul 21 02:18:18 gx280 kernel: dnf[5909]: segfault at ae738a35 ip b573218e sp
> > > > bfe6d090 error 4 in libdb-5.3.so (deleted)[b55f2000+1d1000]
> > > This could the libdb/glibc problem.  Try running "rm /var/lib/rpm/__*"
> > > and then "rpm --rebuilddb" and see if that fixes it.
> > Note that apparently manually rebuilding the DB can result in it having
> > the wrong SELinux label, so you should also run this afterwards (as
> > root):
> > restorecon -RFv /var/lib/rpm
>
> Even when selinux=0?

Well, it wouldn't hurt anything (though it might not work), but it
wouldn't be necessary, if you always boot with SELinux disabled. (Which
of course we do not advise.)
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Adam Williamson
In reply to this post by Ed Greshko
On Sat, 2017-07-22 at 06:04 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:

> On 07/22/17 05:47, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 13:41 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> > > On 07/21/2017 12:28 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > Note that apparently manually rebuilding the DB can result in it having
> > > > the wrong SELinux label, so you should also run this afterwards (as
> > > > root):
> > > >
> > > > restorecon -RFv /var/lib/rpm
> > >
> > > Interesting, I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere else in any of the
> > > discussions of the issue.
> >
> > I was only informed of it a few days ago; I've been editing things
> > since then, but yes, it wasn't known when we wrote the original round
> > of blog posts etc.
>
> Should that be considered a bug in rpmdb?

It's currently counted as a bug in rpm.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1461313
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Samuel Sieb
In reply to this post by Felix Miata-3
On 07/21/2017 05:44 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
> My BRC searches have a habit of either timing out or producing mostly summaries
> with what to me is incomprehensible babble, and that only after great difficulty
> finding one or more Fedora versions to actually select from its endless version
> select list. Once classification Fedora is selected, that select list ought to
> drop precipitously below 100 to choose from.

I think you're making this more complicated than you need to.  I'm
assuming you're using the advanced search.  Select "Fedora" in the
Classification list, select "Fedora" in the Product list, then if you
want to search in specific packages, pick the Components you want.  Then
you can put your search terms in the search box and go.

> Where does one find errata that closed bugs for yet-to-be releases refer to? e.g.
> libdb: Assumes that internal condition variable layout never changes
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394862

I have no idea what you're asking here.  Can you explain in more detail?
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Felix Miata-3
Samuel Sieb composed on 2017-07-21 21:40 (UTC-0700):

> Felix Miata wrote:

>> My BRC searches have a habit of either timing out or producing mostly summaries
>> with what to me is incomprehensible babble, and that only after great difficulty
>> finding one or more Fedora versions to actually select from its endless version
>> select list. Once classification Fedora is selected, that select list ought to
>> drop precipitously below 100 to choose from.

> I think you're making this more complicated than you need to.  I'm
> assuming you're using the advanced search.  Select "Fedora" in the

Did that.

> Classification list, select "Fedora" in the Product list, then if you

Forgot that, but, doing it didn't change the problem....

> want to search in specific packages, pick the Components you want.  Then
> you can put your search terms in the search box and go.

What I wish is to limit the search to bugs filed against F25 or F26, so I goto
the "Version:" select list only to find it contains approximately 2,053
selections from which to choose (I saved https://bugzilla.redhat.com/query.cgi
to disk and found the options to begin on line 1268 and end on line 5273). That
many selections are totally unwieldy in a box that shows only 6 selections at a
time, particularly since that list contains a mixture of alpha-numeric and
numbers-only selections of unknown sort state (A=a, B=b, etc., or not) and I
don't know whether I'm looking for 26, F26 or f26.

I've been doing Bugzilla searches since registering on bugzilla.mozilla.org in
2001. bugzilla.redhat.com is consistently the most difficult BZ installation I
routinely need to use, mainly because of huge "select" lists, "Version:",
"Product" and "Component" in particular.

>> Where does one find errata that closed bugs for yet-to-be releases refer to? e.g.
>> libdb: Assumes that internal condition variable layout never changes
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394862

> I have no idea what you're asking here.  Can you explain in more detail?

Bug 1394862's status is CLOSED ERRATA. According to
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/errata?s=t
errata means:

"1.plural of erratum.
2.a list of errors and their corrections inserted, usually on a separate page or
slip of paper, in a book or other publication; corrigenda."

Knowing that definition, I expect a web search to find me a list describing
something about the state of whatever package, applicable to the not yet
released Fedora 26, contains a fix for that bug, but searching found me no such
list. :-(

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=fields.html#bug_status states a bug with
status ERRATA has a fix that "is available", but I suspect that for this bug and
many others, such status has been applied prematurely/prospectively, confirming
propriety of some kind of available status list.
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Samuel Sieb
On 07/21/2017 10:31 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
> What I wish is to limit the search to bugs filed against F25 or F26, so I goto
> the "Version:" select list only to find it contains approximately 2,053
> selections from which to choose (I saved https://bugzilla.redhat.com/query.cgi
> to disk and found the options to begin on line 1268 and end on line 5273). That
> many selections are totally unwieldy in a box that shows only 6 selections at a
> time, particularly since that list contains a mixture of alpha-numeric and
> numbers-only selections of unknown sort state (A=a, B=b, etc., or not) and I
> don't know whether I'm looking for 26, F26 or f26.

After you've picked Fedora as the product, click the refresh
versions/releases/milestones button.  Then you'll find only the Fedora
release numbers in the version list.
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Chris Murphy
In reply to this post by Felix Miata-3
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 11:31 PM, Felix Miata <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Bug 1394862's status is CLOSED ERRATA. According to
> http://www.dictionary.com/browse/errata?s=t
> errata means:
>
> "1.plural of erratum.
> 2.a list of errors and their corrections inserted, usually on a separate page or
> slip of paper, in a book or other publication; corrigenda."


Same boat. I've been unable to square the language "CLOSED ERRATA" and
actual practice in bug reports. I have no idea what is meant by this,
but I have the same reaction which is "errata OK where are they?"
Except there is none unless you count the individual comments
collectively as "errata". *shrug* Anyway it's a weird convention in my
opinion.



--
Chris Murphy
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Felix Miata-3
In reply to this post by Samuel Sieb
Samuel Sieb composed on 2017-07-22 09:58 (UTC-0700):

> Felix Miata wrote:

>> What I wish is to limit the search to bugs filed against F25 or F26, so I goto
>> the "Version:" select list only to find it contains approximately 2,053
>> selections from which to choose (I saved https://bugzilla.redhat.com/query.cgi
>> to disk and found the options to begin on line 1268 and end on line 5273). That
>> many selections are totally unwieldy in a box that shows only 6 selections at a
>> time, particularly since that list contains a mixture of alpha-numeric and
>> numbers-only selections of unknown sort state (A=a, B=b, etc., or not) and I
>> don't know whether I'm looking for 26, F26 or f26.

> After you've picked Fedora as the product, click the refresh
> versions/releases/milestones button.  Then you'll find only the Fedora
> release numbers in the version list.

O_O

A:
Who would know such a button exists? :-p

Work-flow as I've described:
1-select product
2-select component
3-scroll window down so that version/milestone/target lists are fully visible
4-what refresh button?
5-continue selecting restraints
6-enter search terms in summary and/or comments and/or other
7-Go

Don't you think such a (*unique to BRC* AFAIK) button belongs in the same page
view as the objects to which it applies?

B:
It seems like having made product and component selections the version list
would be refreshed automatically. :-(
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Adam Williamson
In reply to this post by Felix Miata-3
On Sat, 2017-07-22 at 01:31 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

> Bug 1394862's status is CLOSED ERRATA. According to
> http://www.dictionary.com/browse/errata?s=t
> errata means:
>
> "1.plural of erratum.
> 2.a list of errors and their corrections inserted, usually on a separate page or
> slip of paper, in a book or other publication; corrigenda."
>
> Knowing that definition, I expect a web search to find me a list describing
> something about the state of whatever package, applicable to the not yet
> released Fedora 26, contains a fix for that bug, but searching found me no such
> list. :-(
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=fields.html#bug_status states a bug with
> status ERRATA has a fix that "is available", but I suspect that for this bug and
> many others, such status has been applied prematurely/prospectively, confirming
> propriety of some kind of available status list.

Neither of those is the correct reference; in fact the
bugzilla.redhat.com page *specifically states* that it is not the
correct reference for Fedora bugs. The correct reference for Fedora
bugs is https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow :

"Once a bug has been fixed and included in a new package in rawhide or
the updates repo it should be closed. For a stable or Branched release,
the resolution ERRATA should be used. For Rawhide, the resolution
RAWHIDE should be used."

ERRATA just means there was an update (that is, a Bodhi update) that
fixed the bug.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit

Felix Miata-3
In reply to this post by Felix Miata-3
Felix Miata composed on 2017-07-21 03:12 (UTC-0400):

> On Intel P4 host gx280 with 2GB RAM tonight this happened about 2/3 through dnf
> update on both F25 and F26 installations, F26 the latter. Last package's
> scriptlet completed for udisks2. Last line before segfault is upgrading
> gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free. Prior to 'dnf update' on both I had run 'dnf update
> dnf* rpm* glib* drac* libso* hawk* syste* fedo*. In F25 with <70 packages left
> to update I rebooted and restarted dnf update only to have it eventually claim
> completion without ever actually installing the kernel to /boot, though the rpm
> DB claimed it was installed. I reinstalled the kernel and it runs Plasma, but I
> wonder what else didn't get completely installed. Distro-sync wouldn't run due
> to some missing dependant rpm I don't remember. Looking at the journal on F26
> suggests that dnf may have been interrupted by some cron job, and there's this:

> Jul 21 02:18:18 gx280 kernel: dnf[5909]: segfault at ae738a35 ip b573218e sp
> bfe6d090 error 4 in libdb-5.3.so (deleted)[b55f2000+1d1000]

Is there a known procedure for avoiding this on installations last updated
several months ago?
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Loading...