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

Re: Autopkgtest fails if kmer is built with sbuild, but doesn't—with dpkg-buildpackage



Hi,

On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 at 12:59 Liubov Chuprikova <chuprikovalv@gmail.com> wrote:
I faced a problem while building kmer package and after that trying to test it with autopkgtest.

Initially, I built kmer in a sbuild chroot environment and run autopkgtest: it failed.
After that, I run autopkgtest so that it built the package itself from the local source provided and then run a test: it failed.
At last, I built the package using dpkg-buildpackage command and run autopkgtest: it passed.

I could not fully understand the cause of those previous fails, but it seems that sbuild and autopkgtest do something wrong while building. I have just committed the test I tried [1]. Could someone of you do the same to check if the error is reproducible? And if so, we could try to understand the cause of it together. Or maybe I do miss something about all of this.

The error I have looks like:
/usr/bin/../lib/atac/bin/statsGenerator -a /tmp/autopkgtest.nPpQt1/autopkgtest_tmp/results/EcolivsSent.atac -p /tmp/autopkgtest.nPpQt1/autopkgtest_tmp/results/stats/EcolivsSent -g A > /tmp/autopkgtest.nPpQt1/autopkgtest_tmp/results/stats/EcolivsSent.stats
Segmentation fault
Failed to ganerate statistics.

I've made another attempt to figure out the cause of the problem. By now I am almost certain that it is related to different compiler versions in testing and stable. I came to this conclusion based on the following findings.
  • If I build and install atac in stable, and then run it with some test data, it works fine. The same done in testing results in a segfault, mentioned in my previous letter;
  • After looking through the dependencies, I was able to eliminate the segfault on testing by installing an older version of gcc, the one that is used in stable.
I am worried that I will not be able to identify the offending piece of code. Could you suggest how to proceed here?

With regards,
Liubov

Reply to: