Re: Spurious lzma decompression error on ppc64
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 08:15:07AM +0100, Christoph Biedl wrote:
> Hello,
>
> since a few days ago, I get messages like
>
> | Unpacking libsmartcols1:ppc64 (2.31.1-0.4) over (2.30.2-0.3) ...
> | dpkg-deb (subprocess): decompressing archive member: lzma error: compressed data
> | is corrupt
> | dpkg-deb: error: <decompress> subprocess returned error exit status 2
> | dpkg: error processing archive /var/cache/apt/archives/libsmartcols1_2.31.1-0.4_ppc64.deb (--unpack):
> | cannot copy extracted data for './lib/powerpc64-linux-gnu/libsmartcols.so.1.1.0' to '/lib/powerpc64-linux-gnu/libsmartcols.so.1.1.0.dpkg-new': unexpected end of file or stream
> | Errors were encountered while processing:
> | /var/cache/apt/archives/libsmartcols1_2.31.1-0.4_ppc64.deb
>
> There is no obvious pattern in which packages are affected, and just
> repeating the upgrade makes the problem go away. So it's rather not a
> problem with the package itself. Wisdom of the net suggest to indeed
> just redo the installation step, this is just band-aid and feels wrong.
>
> FWIW, the computer benefits from a local apt-cacher-ng but no other
> systems (quite a few, several archs and distributions) connected to it
> shows that behaviour.
>
> Rechecking xz-utils and liblzma using the md5sums file showed no errors.
> So I'm slightly concerned there's something inside that causes these
> errors, and the first idea was some kind of memory corruption, due to
> hardware or kernel.
>
> Anybody else seeing something similar?
Does the problem go away if apt-cacher-ng is bypassed?
In the past I encountered issues with apt-cacher not working if a file
was ever rebuilt (so filename not changed but content was). It would
return the wrong length, corrupt files, mismatching files, etc.
I switched to using a real proxy instead (squid in my case) and later
simply a complete local mirror of desired architectures.
I believe the ppc64 archive has occationally been rebuilt, which isn't
something done to release architectures.
apt-cacher is in my experience a very unreliable tool if anything
unexpected happens. It makes way too many assumptions about how an
archive works.
--
Len Sorensen
Reply to: