[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Corrupt dpkg database? No kernels found

On Nov 30, 10:00 am, "Gordon Farquharson" <gordonfarquhar...@gmail.com>

> Unless anybody can come up with any other ideas or suggestions, my next
> step is to recompile apt-get with debugging information.

A bit of progress last night - I managed to compile apt-get with
debugging symbols after finding
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=306937. A big thank
you to Andreas Henriksson for posting the patch on the day that I
needed it (was that a coincidence ?). Here is the output from gdb:

sh-3.1# gdb apt-get
GNU gdb 6.5-debian
Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and
you are
welcome to change it and/or distribute copies of it under certain
Type "show copying" to see the conditions.
There is absolutely no warranty for GDB.  Type "show warranty" for
This GDB was configured as "arm-linux-gnu"...Using host libthread_db
library "/lib/libthread_db.so.1".

(gdb) run -f install
Starting program: /usr/bin/apt-get -f install
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Correcting dependencies...
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x4008d100 in pkgDepCache::Update (this=0x3f020, D=
      {Dep = 0x41fef230, Type = pkgCache::DepIterator::DepRev, Owner =
0x3ec38}) at depcache.cc:464
464     depcache.cc: No such file or directory.
        in depcache.cc

and in depcache.cc:

    455 // DepCache::Update - Update the deps list of a package
    456 //
    457 /* This is a helper for update that only does the dep portion
of the scan.
    458    It is mainly ment to scan reverse dependencies. */
    459 void pkgDepCache::Update(DepIterator D)
    460 {
    461    // Update the reverse deps
    462    for (;D.end() != true; D++)
    463    {
    464       unsigned char &State = DepState[D->ID];
    465       State = DependencyState(D);

BTW, I had to switch to apt from unstable because the patch
didn't apply nicely to from testing.

This is as far as I have got for this evening.


Reply to: