On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 1:03 AM, Jarod Wilson <jarod(a)wilsonet.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 12:50 AM, Jarod Wilson
<jarod(a)wilsonet.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Jarod Wilson <jarod(a)wilsonet.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Jarod Wilson <jarod(a)wilsonet.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Hans de Goede
<j.w.r.degoede(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> ...
>>>>>> Just a note to people hosting builders, due to glibc changes
>>>>>> in rawhide all builders now need run kernels>= 2.6.32,
otherwise
>>>>>> rawhide / development builds will likely fail.
>> ...
>>>> AFAIK the current Fedora builders are running EL6 beta2
>>>
>>> Yep, Dennis mentioned that to me the other day. He didn't mention
>>> exactly *why*, I just assumed we were eating our own dogfood... Guess
>>> I'll start coming up with a plan for updating my builder.
>>
>> Shutting my builder vm down, copying the disk image, then starting a
>> rhel6 upgrade attempt...
>
> Wasn't exactly smooth, but the vm is up and running rhel6 now, and its
> reporting in to the build system... Flinging a build at it now... So
> far, so good.
Spoke too soon. Fail:
...
DEBUG util.py:255:
updates-released 137 k
DEBUG util.py:255: xz-libs x86_64
4.999.9-0.2.beta.20091007git.fc12
DEBUG util.py:255:
updates-released 89 k
DEBUG util.py:255: xz-lzma-compat x86_64
4.999.9-0.2.beta.20091007git.fc12
DEBUG util.py:255:
updates-released 15 k
DEBUG util.py:255: zlib x86_64 1.2.3-23.fc12
fedora 69 k
DEBUG util.py:255: Transaction Summary
DEBUG util.py:255:
================================================================================
DEBUG util.py:255: Install 102 Package(s)
DEBUG util.py:255: Upgrade 0 Package(s)
DEBUG util.py:255: Total download size: 81 M
DEBUG util.py:255: Installed size: 296 M
DEBUG util.py:255: warning: /etc/hosts created as /etc/hosts.rpmnew
DEBUG util.py:255: *** glibc detected *** /usr/bin/python: double
free or corruption (!prev): 0x000000000934f740 ***
DEBUG util.py:255: ======= Backtrace: =========
DEBUG util.py:328: Child returncode was: -6
DEBUG backend.py:593: umount -n
/var/lib/mock/fedora-12-x86_64-rpmfusion_free-5d5b7fcdebeb364e7600033c101fedcd3a63cd0c/root/proc
DEBUG util.py:289: Executing command: umount -n
/var/lib/mock/fedora-12-x86_64-rpmfusion_free-5d5b7fcdebeb364e7600033c101fedcd3a63cd0c/root/proc
DEBUG util.py:328: Child returncode was: 0
DEBUG backend.py:593: umount -n
/var/lib/mock/fedora-12-x86_64-rpmfusion_free-5d5b7fcdebeb364e7600033c101fedcd3a63cd0c/root/sys
DEBUG util.py:289: Executing command: umount -n
/var/lib/mock/fedora-12-x86_64-rpmfusion_free-5d5b7fcdebeb364e7600033c101fedcd3a63cd0c/root/sys
DEBUG util.py:328: Child returncode was: 0
DEBUG backend.py:593: umount -n
/var/lib/mock/fedora-12-x86_64-rpmfusion_free-5d5b7fcdebeb364e7600033c101fedcd3a63cd0c/root/dev/pts
DEBUG util.py:289: Executing command: umount -n
/var/lib/mock/fedora-12-x86_64-rpmfusion_free-5d5b7fcdebeb364e7600033c101fedcd3a63cd0c/root/dev/pts
DEBUG util.py:328: Child returncode was: 0
DEBUG backend.py:593: umount -n
/var/lib/mock/fedora-12-x86_64-rpmfusion_free-5d5b7fcdebeb364e7600033c101fedcd3a63cd0c/root/dev/shm
DEBUG util.py:289: Executing command: umount -n
/var/lib/mock/fedora-12-x86_64-rpmfusion_free-5d5b7fcdebeb364e7600033c101fedcd3a63cd0c/root/dev/shm
DEBUG util.py:328: Child returncode was: 0
DEBUG util.py:77: remove tree:
/var/lib/mock/fedora-12-x86_64-rpmfusion_free-5d5b7fcdebeb364e7600033c101fedcd3a63cd0c
DEBUG util.py:97: kill orphans
I saw a similar glibc bomb running a yum remove while cleaning up some
detritus earlier tonight too. Looks like something bugly somewhere in
the rhel6 stack. Will look into it more tomorrow, its past my bed
time. :\
Red Hat Bugzilla #608710 and friends. I've applied a patch attached to
that bug (patches an rpm lib) that is thought to possibly fix the
problem and installed the resulting build on my builder, and just
threw a previously failed build at it... Quite a few rhel6 kvm guest
installs are apparently hitting this one, so I expect if this patch
isn't the fix, someone is going to get to the bottom of this
post-haste. :) (Fingers crossed the one-line patch is indeed the fix
though).
--
Jarod Wilson
jarod(a)wilsonet.com