On 02/22/2011 12:23 PM, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> Allan broke it!
>
> No, seriously... glibc 2.13-4 introduced a patch from the Fedora glibc
> branch that is not included in mainline glibc and fixes issues with
> prelink [1]. Obviously, this has some side effects. Seems like it
> requires some more investigation.
>
> [1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/22656
Thank you Lukas!
--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
02-22-2011, 07:30 PM
"David C. Rankin"
On 02/22/2011 12:23 PM, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> No, seriously... glibc 2.13-4 introduced a patch from the Fedora glibc
> branch that is not included in mainline glibc and fixes issues with
> prelink [1]. Obviously, this has some side effects. Seems like it
> requires some more investigation.
>
> [1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/22656
Oops, Sorry,
I forgot to ask -- "Do we need to reopend the bug, or just let you guys look
at it based on the email?"
--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
02-22-2011, 07:45 PM
"David C. Rankin"
On 02/22/2011 11:41 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:
> <snip>
>
> Guys,
>
> The problem is glibc-2.13-4. I have about 5 Arch/Trinity Virtualbox VMs. On
> one I had not updated, I started Trinity x86_64 and there was NO kdesktop crash.
> I then proceeded to update the VM to the current Arch packages which included:
>
<snip>
> cc: arch-general
>
> Arch devs - Do you think this could be a packaging/patch issue with Arch, or
> do you think is going to be glibc itself? It looks like glibc to me, but I
> thought I'd ask first before going to the glibc folks.
>
>
We are homing in on the cause and a possible solution:
<quote>
glibc 2.13-4 introduced a patch from the Fedora glibc branch that is not
included in mainline glibc and fixes issues with prelink [1]. Obviously, this
has some side effects. Seems like it requires some more investigation.
On Tuesday, February 22, 2011 07:41:53 PM Allan McRae wrote:
>
> That prelink patch is very, very unlikely to cause the issue. It was
> also the only change between 2.13-3 and 2.13-4... As I pointed out,
> there are other distros using that patch without reported issue and it
> is now in glibc mainline so nothing is obviously wrong with it. Also, I
> have had no other crash reports since this update...
>
> Allan
KDE4/Kernel segfaults when I plug in a USB device ( Nook ) after I updated
today. It Worked fine since last week befor I updated.
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 11:41:12AM -0600, David C. Rankin wrote:
On next reboot/restart, I got the kdesktop.kcrash (attached). So then I
downgraded glibc (2.13-4 -> 2.13-3), restarted Trinity -> perfect No
kdesktop,kcrash. It looks like this is a glibc issue, so I'll follow up (below)
with Arch to make sure it looks like glibc and not a package issue. Thanks for
your help.
cc: arch-general
Arch devs - Do you think this could be a packaging/patch issue with Arch, or
do you think is going to be glibc itself? It looks like glibc to me, but I
thought I'd ask first before going to the glibc folks.
Allan broke it!
No, seriously... glibc 2.13-4 introduced a patch from the Fedora glibc
branch that is not included in mainline glibc and fixes issues with
prelink [1]. Obviously, this has some side effects. Seems like it
requires some more investigation.
[1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/22656
That patch has been in mainline glibc for a couple of days now and is
running on Fedora, Gentoo, ...
Allan
02-22-2011, 11:13 PM
"David C. Rankin"
On 02/22/2011 05:07 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 23/02/11 04:23, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 11:41:12AM -0600, David C. Rankin wrote:
>>> On next reboot/restart, I got the kdesktop.kcrash (attached). So then I
>>> downgraded glibc (2.13-4 -> 2.13-3), restarted Trinity -> perfect No
>>> kdesktop,kcrash. It looks like this is a glibc issue, so I'll follow up (below)
>>> with Arch to make sure it looks like glibc and not a package issue. Thanks for
>>> your help.
>>>
<snip>
>>
>> No, seriously... glibc 2.13-4 introduced a patch from the Fedora glibc
>> branch that is not included in mainline glibc and fixes issues with
>> prelink [1]. Obviously, this has some side effects. Seems like it
>> requires some more investigation.
>>
>> [1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/22656
>>
>
> That patch has been in mainline glibc for a couple of days now and is running on
> Fedora, Gentoo, ...
>
> Allan
>
>
>
Any ideas on the x86_64 kdesktop crash that happens with glibc 2.13-4 but is
absent with 2.13-3? Any reason to try recompiling glibc without
glibc-2.13-prelink.patch - or - will that just give me 2.13-3?
--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
02-22-2011, 11:41 PM
Allan McRae
On 23/02/11 10:13, David C. Rankin wrote:
On 02/22/2011 05:07 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
On 23/02/11 04:23, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 11:41:12AM -0600, David C. Rankin wrote:
On next reboot/restart, I got the kdesktop.kcrash (attached). So then I
downgraded glibc (2.13-4 -> 2.13-3), restarted Trinity -> perfect No
kdesktop,kcrash. It looks like this is a glibc issue, so I'll follow up (below)
with Arch to make sure it looks like glibc and not a package issue. Thanks for
your help.
<snip>
No, seriously... glibc 2.13-4 introduced a patch from the Fedora glibc
branch that is not included in mainline glibc and fixes issues with
prelink [1]. Obviously, this has some side effects. Seems like it
requires some more investigation.
[1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/22656
That patch has been in mainline glibc for a couple of days now and is running on
Fedora, Gentoo, ...
Allan
Any ideas on the x86_64 kdesktop crash that happens with glibc 2.13-4 but is
absent with 2.13-3? Any reason to try recompiling glibc without
glibc-2.13-prelink.patch - or - will that just give me 2.13-3?
That prelink patch is very, very unlikely to cause the issue. It was
also the only change between 2.13-3 and 2.13-4... As I pointed out,
there are other distros using that patch without reported issue and it
is now in glibc mainline so nothing is obviously wrong with it. Also, I
have had no other crash reports since this update...
I just looked back through this thread and your backtraces are all over
the place. First it was an issue with libxcb, and then on a different
VM it is somewhere completely different. What is difference across
your VMs that you get consistent crashes in one but not the other?
Allan
02-23-2011, 12:44 AM
"Nick Bebout"
I committed this as an "emergency", since root@redhat was getting about
20-30 emails per minute
2 +1's please?
Yeah, this is kind of hacky, but it should work, and I doubt any useful
email is being sent to l10n-admins at this time from transifex.
Nick
---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: [puppet] Set ADMINS to nobody@fpo to stop spamming root@redhat
with ~20-30 errors per minute
From: "Nick Bebout" <nb@fedoraproject.org>
Date: Tue, February 22, 2011 7:38 pm
To: sysadmin-members@fedoraproject.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
commit a8c8461cc158d58d666c7fb3b6f2d58dd342f244
Author: Nick Bebout <nb@puppet01.phx2.fedoraproject.org>
Date: Wed Feb 23 01:38:15 2011 +0000
Set ADMINS to nobody@fpo to stop spamming root@redhat with ~20-30
errors per minute
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
02-23-2011, 12:53 AM
Dennis Gilmore
On Tuesday, February 22, 2011 07:44:35 pm Nick Bebout wrote:
> I committed this as an "emergency", since root@redhat was getting about
> 20-30 emails per minute
>
> 2 +1's please?
>
> Yeah, this is kind of hacky, but it should work, and I doubt any useful
> email is being sent to l10n-admins at this time from transifex.
>
> Nick
>
> ---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
> Subject: [puppet] Set ADMINS to nobody@fpo to stop spamming root@redhat
> with ~20-30 errors per minute
> From: "Nick Bebout" <nb@fedoraproject.org>
> Date: Tue, February 22, 2011 7:38 pm
> To: sysadmin-members@fedoraproject.org
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> commit a8c8461cc158d58d666c7fb3b6f2d58dd342f244
> Author: Nick Bebout <nb@puppet01.phx2.fedoraproject.org>
> Date: Wed Feb 23 01:38:15 2011 +0000
>
> Set ADMINS to nobody@fpo to stop spamming root@redhat with ~20-30
> errors per minute
>
> modules/transifex/files/30-site.conf | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> ---
> diff --git a/modules/transifex/files/30-site.conf
> b/modules/transifex/files/30-site.conf
> index 8cb1824..82d9b18 100644
> --- a/modules/transifex/files/30-site.conf
> +++ b/modules/transifex/files/30-site.conf
> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ SITE_ID = 1
> SITE_DOMAIN = 'fedoraproject.org'
>
> ADMINS = (
> - ('Fedora Admins', 'l10n-admin-members@fedoraproject.org'),
> + ('Fedora Admins', 'nobody@fedoraproject.org'),
> )
>
> MANAGERS = ADMINS
i question why root@redhat.com was getting mail for l10n-admin-
members@fedoraproject.org
sounds like something is not setup right somewhere
Dennis
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
02-23-2011, 12:56 AM
"Nick Bebout"
The last two patches should fix the root cause of the spams, and extra
space before except and pass.
I applied these as "emergency" patches also, to avoid flooding root@redhat
with like ~20-30 errors per minute
Nick
---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: [puppet] Fix more indenting
From: "Nick Bebout" <nb@fedoraproject.org>
Date: Tue, February 22, 2011 7:51 pm
To: sysadmin-members@fedoraproject.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
commit da94ee041dfe914c90669365feac08c03f1302a6
Author: Nick Bebout <nb@puppet01.phx2.fedoraproject.org>
Date: Wed Feb 23 01:51:00 2011 +0000
Fix more indenting
.../hotfix/files/transifex/tx-simpleauth-views.py | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/modules/hotfix/files/transifex/tx-simpleauth-views.py
b/modules/hotfix/files/transifex/tx-simpleauth-views.py
index 02bf8e1..e26751e 100644
--- a/modules/hotfix/files/transifex/tx-simpleauth-views.py
+++ b/modules/hotfix/files/transifex/tx-simpleauth-views.py
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ def login(request, template_name='simpleauth/signin.html'):
try:
request.user.message_set.create(
message=_("Login is disabled due to migration to
fedora.transifex.net."))
- except:
+ except:
pass
return HttpResponseRedirect(reverse('transifex.home'))
# next = clean_next(request.GET.get('next'))
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
