Re: dpkg segfaults
On Sat, 5 May 2001, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> Richard Kettlewell writes:
> > On 10 Mar 2001, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> >> I still can't reproduce it. Perhaps there is some other
> >> difference. I'll give up trying to reproduce it for now.
> >> Do you have any other information about how you've tracked down the
> >> problem to that particular revision? I've just re-read the diff
> >> and still can't spot any possible problems.
> > Any chance of an answer to this?
> Some time ago you asked if I could help on this. But it's not
> possible for me to do anything if you won't answer my requests for
> further information.
The removal of this patch had no effect, for Dan's reproducible segfault. I
did it locally, on HEAD a few months ago, and it still segfaulted in the exact
I have not tested any dpkg from the 1.9 series(which includes my unitialized
vars fix), against Dan's bug.
> | From: Wichert Akkerman <email@example.com>
> | Subject: dpkg segfaults
> | Newsgroups: chiark.mail.debian.dpkg
> | To: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
> | Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
> | Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 18:32:01 GMT
> | Resent-From: email@example.com
> | Resent-Message-ID: <qTmK7.A.phC.CY8o6@murphy>
> | Message-ID: <20010305175928.Q352@cistron.nl>
> | Dan managed to come up with a way to reproduce a dpkg segfault. After
> | some poking around with dpkg the problem turned out to be that the
> | filelist was being written over the package information. Oops!
> | The problem seems to be a patch applied to main/filesdb.c on Dec 5 1999
> | (http://cvs.debian.org/dpkg/main/filesdb.c.diff?r1=1.10&r2=1.11&cvsroot=dpkg)
> | which was included in dpkg 1.6.1 or 1.6.2. The patch came from Richard
> | Kettlewell and reduces the dpkg memory uses.