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

Bug#190110: libc6: Sub-processes flaking out.

GOTO Masanori <gotom@debian.or.jp> writes:

>> Note that mounting the old disk in the rebuilt system and using it
>> for a chrooted environment fails to reproduce the problem.  So, I
>> thought, "perhaps a corrupted kernel" and used dpkg --root=/mnt to
>> install a new kernel on the old partition.  Yet, the problem is
>> still there if I boot from the old partition after doing this.
> Does not 2.4.20-686 help you?

I use  XFS and so have to  custom-compile a kernel.  But  I think I've
pretty  much ruled  out the  kernel  as the  issue here  as well  (see

> Hm, so do you have problems only for debuild?

No. For example, I can't start apache-ssl at all.  Courier IMAPd is
giving me terrible problems[1].  And the problem does seem to be time
related -- the longer the kernel is running the worse the problem
seems to get.

I mentioned I have two systems that showed the same problem.  I
cleared up some disk space on my other system and did an installation
there using testing as the source.  It works (as I expected).

Now, the interesting thing:

Here is how I'm pretty sure that the problem is not the kernel.
Running the old system while I configured the chrooted environment[2]
under /mnt, I found that the chrooted system had no problems -- I was
able to run 'apt-get dist-upgrade' w/o tar freaking out.  Since the
only difference was the chroot, I would assume that the problem wasn't
the kernel.

And I did md5sum /lib/libc.so.6, /lib/ld-linux.so.2, etc on the root
and chroot, but failed to find any differences.

As I said, doing a clean install to testing seemed to do the trick.

Still, this seems like an upgrade problem rather than a glibc problem,
per se.  I'm not how to investigate this further unless someone wants
me to send them my hard drive.



[1] "Failed to create cache file: maildirwatch Error:
Input/output error" for most any IMAP command.

[2] It is production, so even though it is buggy I've at least got it
stumbling along.

Reply to: