Re: dpkg segmentation fault
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 03:11:24 -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> I am helping a buddy with his Sid system. He went several months
> without upgrading. Then recently tried to upgrade. This resulted in
> some problems. Currently the system produces a segmentation fault
> when trying to install packages. For example:
>
> # dpkg-reconfigure debconf
> Segmentation fault
>
> # dpkg -i debconf_1.5.49_all.deb
> (Reading database ... 387854 files and directories currently installed.)
> Preparing to replace debconf 1.5.49 (using debconf_1.5.49_all.deb) ...
> Unpacking replacement debconf ...
> Setting up debconf (1.5.49) ...
> dpkg: error processing debconf (--install):
> subprocess installed post-installation script was killed by signal (Segmentation fault)
> Errors were encountered while processing:
> debconf
>
> Of course the segfault makes it difficult to make any forward progress
> with dpkg. dpkg is up to date Sid version 1.17.1. But almost all
> other packages are older revs from previous days of Sid. I tried
> downgrading dpkg to the version in Wheezy but the result was the same.
>
> Thought before I did extreme things that I would ask here in case
> someone already hit this in Sid sometime between a few months ago and
> now? If so what was the solution?
My guess would be an incomplete or otherwise screwed-up Perl transition
(dpkg-reconfigure is a Perl script and debconf's postinst calls a bunch
of Perl scripts as well). Check the status of the Perl packages on your
friend's machine, here is what I have on up-to-date Sid/amd64:
$ dpkg -l perl\* libperl\* | awk '/^ii/{print $2,$3}'
libperl4-corelibs-perl 0.003-1
libperl5.18 5.18.1-4
perl 5.18.1-4
perl-base 5.18.1-4
perl-doc 5.18.1-4
perl-modules 5.18.1-4
perl-tk 1:804.031-1+b1
perlmagick 8:6.7.7.10-6
Other than that, I can only say that I cannot recall having any problems
with my Sid system in recent months, even though upgrading all packages
that can be upgraded is how I start almost every day.
--
Regards, |
Florian | http://www.florian-kulzer.eu
Reply to: