FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux General Discussion

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 09-22-2012, 06:09 AM
Zhengyu Xu
 
Default testing/systemd 191-1 failed to boot

Dear all,

After updating systemd to 191-1 in testing repo, I had following
messages during booting and the process was stuck (crashed).

[ 10.539416] systemd[1]: segfault at 7d ip b75a97b7 sp bfb0ece8 error
4 in libc-2.16.so[b752a000+1a4000]
[ 10.539700] systemd[1]: Caught <SEGV>, core dump failed.

Downgrade to 189-4 can solve this problem. I want to know if this
is a personal problem or a general bug affecting others as well.

Best regards,
Z.
 
Old 09-22-2012, 06:30 AM
Aurko Roy
 
Default testing/systemd 191-1 failed to boot

On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Zhengyu Xu <xzy3186@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> After updating systemd to 191-1 in testing repo, I had following
> messages during booting and the process was stuck (crashed).
>
> [ 10.539416] systemd[1]: segfault at 7d ip b75a97b7 sp bfb0ece8 error
> 4 in libc-2.16.so[b752a000+1a4000]
> [ 10.539700] systemd[1]: Caught <SEGV>, core dump failed.
>
> Downgrade to 189-4 can solve this problem. I want to know if this
> is a personal problem or a general bug affecting others as well.
>
> Best regards,
> Z.
>
>
Boots fine on my x86_64 desktop.

--
Aurko Roy
GPG key: 0x20C5BC31
Fingerprint:76B4 9677 15BE 731D 1949 85BA 2A31 B442 20C5 BC31
 
Old 09-22-2012, 06:37 AM
Zhengyu Xu
 
Default testing/systemd 191-1 failed to boot

On Sat, 2012-09-22 at 12:00 +0530, Aurko Roy wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Zhengyu Xu <xzy3186@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > After updating systemd to 191-1 in testing repo, I had following
> > messages during booting and the process was stuck (crashed).
> >
> > [ 10.539416] systemd[1]: segfault at 7d ip b75a97b7 sp bfb0ece8 error
> > 4 in libc-2.16.so[b752a000+1a4000]
> > [ 10.539700] systemd[1]: Caught <SEGV>, core dump failed.
> >
> > Downgrade to 189-4 can solve this problem. I want to know if this
> > is a personal problem or a general bug affecting others as well.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Z.
> >
> >
> Boots fine on my x86_64 desktop.
>

Thank you, I forgot to say that mine is i686.
 
Old 09-22-2012, 08:07 AM
Heiko Baums
 
Default testing/systemd 191-1 failed to boot

Am Sat, 22 Sep 2012 15:09:02 +0900
schrieb Zhengyu Xu <xzy3186@gmail.com>:

> After updating systemd to 191-1 in testing repo, I had following
> messages during booting and the process was stuck (crashed).
>
> [ 10.539416] systemd[1]: segfault at 7d ip b75a97b7 sp bfb0ece8
> error 4 in libc-2.16.so[b752a000+1a4000]
> [ 10.539700] systemd[1]: Caught <SEGV>, core dump failed.
>
> Downgrade to 189-4 can solve this problem. I want to know if this
> is a personal problem or a general bug affecting others as well.

Why am I not surprised?

Yes, binary init system is so much better than a script based init
system. And Poetterix is so damn good, so advanced, such an evolution
and so much better than the common and over 40 years well tested
sysvinit.

Come on systemd fanboys, here you have the first example. There's more
to come. I'll get my popcorn.

Heiko
 
Old 09-22-2012, 08:15 AM
fredbezies
 
Default testing/systemd 191-1 failed to boot

2012/9/22 Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de>:
> Am Sat, 22 Sep 2012 15:09:02 +0900
> schrieb Zhengyu Xu <xzy3186@gmail.com>:
>
>> After updating systemd to 191-1 in testing repo, I had following
>> messages during booting and the process was stuck (crashed).
>>
>> [ 10.539416] systemd[1]: segfault at 7d ip b75a97b7 sp bfb0ece8
>> error 4 in libc-2.16.so[b752a000+1a4000]
>> [ 10.539700] systemd[1]: Caught <SEGV>, core dump failed.
>>
>> Downgrade to 189-4 can solve this problem. I want to know if this
>> is a personal problem or a general bug affecting others as well.
>
> Why am I not surprised?
>
> Yes, binary init system is so much better than a script based init
> system. And Poetterix is so damn good, so advanced, such an evolution
> and so much better than the common and over 40 years well tested
> sysvinit.

Don't you read the *important* word : testing ! Are you blind ?

>
> Come on systemd fanboys, here you have the first example. There's more
> to come. I'll get my popcorn.

I'm not a systemd fanboy, neither an initscripts one. I'm using
systemd and it works. I'm just waiting a little before upgrading my
*working* version.

Your words stinks like :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quarrel_of_the_Ancients_and_the_Moderns

Nothing new here since 1690, so...

>
> Heiko

Are you stuck in 1690 or are we in the 2010's ?

--
Frederic Bezies
fredbezies@gmail.com
 
Old 09-22-2012, 08:18 AM
Allan McRae
 
Default testing/systemd 191-1 failed to boot

On 22/09/12 18:07, Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am Sat, 22 Sep 2012 15:09:02 +0900
> schrieb Zhengyu Xu <xzy3186@gmail.com>:
>
>> After updating systemd to 191-1 in testing repo, I had following
>> messages during booting and the process was stuck (crashed).
>>
>> [ 10.539416] systemd[1]: segfault at 7d ip b75a97b7 sp bfb0ece8
>> error 4 in libc-2.16.so[b752a000+1a4000]
>> [ 10.539700] systemd[1]: Caught <SEGV>, core dump failed.
>>
>> Downgrade to 189-4 can solve this problem. I want to know if this
>> is a personal problem or a general bug affecting others as well.
>
> Why am I not surprised?

Medical condition?

> Yes, binary init system is so much better than a script based init
> system. And Poetterix is so damn good, so advanced, such an evolution
> and so much better than the common and over 40 years well tested
> sysvinit.
>
> Come on systemd fanboys, here you have the first example. There's more
> to come. I'll get my popcorn.
>

Because we have never had unbootable systems due to upgrades in
[testing] before... You say "sysvinit" but that relied on many compiled
binaries (e.g. bash)

Allan
 
Old 09-22-2012, 08:23 AM
Allan McRae
 
Default testing/systemd 191-1 failed to boot

On 22/09/12 17:24, Allan McRae wrote:
> FYI, many people are reporting this on i686.

I removed the i686 systemd package from [testing]. No point keeping
this there...

Allan
 
Old 09-22-2012, 08:32 AM
Heiko Baums
 
Default testing/systemd 191-1 failed to boot

Am Sat, 22 Sep 2012 10:15:16 +0200
schrieb fredbezies <fredbezies@gmail.com>:

> Don't you read the *important* word : testing ! Are you blind ?

I read that. And what goes into [testing]? Yes! Bingo! Software version
which are released by upstream as *stable*. So yes, upstream was
supposed to have this tested before it went into Arch's [testing].

*rofl*

And how do [testing] users update their system when initscripts will be
removed?

How do you fix a borked Windoze systemd? Right, with a Windoze free
LiveCD. How do you fix a borked systemd system? Right, with a systemd
free LiveCD. *lol*

> Are you stuck in 1690 or are we in the 2010's ?

Even in the 2010's it can be better to stuck with 40 years old, well
tested software instead of switching to new crap.

You don't consider that I'm not against new software and new versions,
but I'm against crap.

Heiko
 
Old 09-22-2012, 08:42 AM
Heiko Baums
 
Default testing/systemd 191-1 failed to boot

Am Sat, 22 Sep 2012 18:18:49 +1000
schrieb Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org>:

> Medical condition?

I'm very fine. Thanks.

Do I really need to say PulseAudio and Lennart Poettering? And do I
really need to say "made my own experiences" (with PA and systemd,
btw.).

> Because we have never had unbootable systems due to upgrades in
> [testing] before...

And now you have them. Did you have even one totally unbootable system
with sysvinit and initscripts? I doubt that.

> You say "sysvinit" but that relied on many
> compiled binaries (e.g. bash)

And how many segfaults were brought to you by bash over all those
years? And all the other binaries? Right, if one of them would really
segfault (I've never seen this) the system would still be bootable,
because then only this one binary segfaults, but not the whole
initsystem.

And if it's just one daemon, it can easily be deactivated like faulty
parts of an initscript. But yes, it's so hard to debug those scripts.
Now with systemd you can allegedly easily debug the systemd but you
can't boot the system anymore to be able to debug systemd. *rofl*

Heiko
 
Old 09-22-2012, 08:52 AM
Allan McRae
 
Default testing/systemd 191-1 failed to boot

On 22/09/12 18:42, Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am Sat, 22 Sep 2012 18:18:49 +1000
> schrieb Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org>:
>
>> Medical condition?
>
> I'm very fine. Thanks.
>
> Do I really need to say PulseAudio and Lennart Poettering? And do I
> really need to say "made my own experiences" (with PA and systemd,
> btw.).
>
>> Because we have never had unbootable systems due to upgrades in
>> [testing] before...
>
> And now you have them. Did you have even one totally unbootable system
> with sysvinit and initscripts? I doubt that.

Yes. A bash update in [testing] resulted in unbootable systems. I
thought you were around then... maybe it just feels that long.

Allan
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 11:14 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org