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

Bug#174140: marked as done (libc6 2.3.1-6 is badly broken!)



Your message dated Tue, 24 Dec 2002 23:47:26 +0900
with message-id <80k7hzxym9.wl@oris.opensource.jp>
and subject line Bug#174140: libc6 2.3.1-6 is badly broken!
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Dec 2002 23:24:59 +0000
>From caribou@starpower.net Mon Dec 23 17:24:59 2002
Return-path: <caribou@starpower.net>
Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.61] 
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
	id 18QbwR-0005bs-00; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 17:24:59 -0600
Received: from ms03.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.17])
	by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #4)
	id 18QbwQ-0006I9-00
	for submit@bugs.debian.org; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:24:58 -0500
Received: from 66.92.146.91
	by ms03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.2.2-GA)
	with HTTP/1.1;
	Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:24:58 -0500
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:24:58 -0500
From: caribou@starpower.net
Subject: libc6 2.3.1-6 is badly broken!
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Mailer: Webmail Mirapoint Direct 3.2.2-GA
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <[🔎] E18QbwQ-0006I9-00@smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0
	tests=NO_REAL_NAME,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01
	version=2.41
X-Spam-Level: 

Package: libc6 (unstable)
Version: 2.3.1-6
Severity: critical

Earlier today, had an "unstable" workstation I decided to do
an "apt-get update;apt-get upgrade" to get the latest &
greatest.  All is well for a few minutes, until such time as
the apt-get blows up during the software install. Something
about unable to stat directory /var/cache/apt/updates/, libc6
not configured properly. Uh oh, this doesn't sound good. 
(Sorry I didn't have the foresight to write down the exact
messages, but if you'll read on, hopefully I can document this
enough to be reproducable).

All of my open X apps are running fine, but things are weird
in the shell. dpkg dies with the same error (complains about
/var/cache/apt/updates) whenever I try to do anything with it.
I can't reference the current "." directory, top and ps both
run but they don't show any process information, etc. I figure
I'm hosed, but give a fresh reboot just in case. LILO starts
normally but all I get at the login prompt is "unable to
determine TTY". Interesting.

At this point, though, I was curious whether I had just
stumbled across some weird anomaly caused by a strange
combination of packages on my machine, or whether something
was seriously broked in unstable distro.  Since there was no
vital data on the machine, I reformatted and did a fresh
install of Debian 3.0r0 from CD, just the base system to get
to a shell prompt and essential packages.  I set my apt source
to "unstable" (server ftp://ftp.debian.org) and tried to
install just the same libc6 that had caused problems before:
"apt-get update;apt-get install libc6", which causes dpkg to
break exactly as described above, and leaves the system in
exactly the same unusable state.

Target machine is a Pentium-III 450, 256MB, which had been
running Debian unstable for at least 6 months with no
problems.  The problem occured with both kernel 2.4.17 (first
time) and 2.2.18 (or whatever kernel 3.0 stable installs by
default).

Sorry some of this isn't better documented, but as I said, all
I had to do to reproduce it was install the unstable libc6
package on a fresh stable system.  I won't be around the
machine in question again until next week, but would be happy
to answer any questions that might be useful.


--
sonicforest.com

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 174140-done) by bugs.debian.org; 24 Dec 2002 14:47:29 +0000
>From gotom@debian.or.jp Tue Dec 24 08:47:29 2002
Return-path: <gotom@debian.or.jp>
Received: from oris.opensource.jp (oris.opensource.gr.jp) [218.44.239.73] (postfix)
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
	id 18QqLA-0004vh-00; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:47:29 -0600
Received: from oris.opensource.jp (oris.opensource.jp [218.44.239.73])
	by oris.opensource.gr.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id DE816C33C1; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 23:47:26 +0900 (JST)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 23:47:26 +0900
Message-ID: <80k7hzxym9.wl@oris.opensource.jp>
From: GOTO Masanori <gotom@debian.or.jp>
To: Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>,
	174140-done@bugs.debian.org
Cc: caribou@starpower.net
Subject: Re: Bug#174140: libc6 2.3.1-6 is badly broken!
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 1040722137.19392.29.camel@bohr>
References: <[🔎] E18QbwQ-0006I9-00@smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net>
	<[🔎] 1040722137.19392.29.camel@bohr>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.9.9 (Unchained Melody) SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya)
 FLIM/1.14.3 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Unebigory=F2mae?=) APEL/10.3 Emacs/21.2
 (i386-debian-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.3 - "Ushinoya")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Delivered-To: 174140-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.3 required=5.0
	tests=IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,
	      USER_AGENT
	version=2.41
X-Spam-Level: 

At 24 Dec 2002 04:28:57 -0500,
Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-12-23 at 18:24, caribou@starpower.net wrote:
> 
> > Target machine is a Pentium-III 450, 256MB, which had been
> > running Debian unstable for at least 6 months with no
> > problems.  The problem occured with both kernel 2.4.17 (first
> > time)
> 
> Are you sure about that? -7 was supposed to fix this problem, but the
> problem is thought to only occur on 2.2.x/2.3.x kernels (it depended on
> kernel changes that happened sometime in 2.4.0-test)

That's right. -7 is already released. I close this bug.

-- gotom



Reply to: