Received: (qmail 10610 invoked by uid 2012); 13 Feb 1999 17:57:20 -0000 Message-Id: <19990213175720.10609.qmail@hyperreal.org> Date: 13 Feb 1999 17:57:20 -0000 From: Gaven Cohen Reply-To: dragon@wastelands.net To: apbugs@hyperreal.org Subject: 1.3.4 server starts, seemingly normally... dies, no children, no errors not the case with 1.2.0 X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.2 >Number: 3897 >Category: os-linux >Synopsis: 1.3.4 server starts, seemingly normally... dies, no children, no errors not the case with 1.2.0 >Confidential: no >Severity: serious >Priority: medium >Responsible: apache >State: closed >Quarter: >Keywords: >Date-Required: >Class: sw-bug >Submitter-Id: apache >Arrival-Date: Sat Feb 13 11:10:00 PST 1999 >Closed-Date: Mon Oct 30 18:56:17 PST 2000 >Last-Modified: Mon Oct 30 18:56:17 PST 2000 >Originator: dragon@wastelands.net >Release: 1.3.4 >Organization: >Environment: Linux dragon 2.2.1 #1 Wed Feb 3 14:41:10 GMT+0200 1999 i686 unknown gcc version 2.7.2.3 elf, glibc 2.0.7 >Description: I'm trying to upgrade from 1.2.0 to 1.3.4. The compile is fine, but 1.3.4 will not start. It starts, as usual, but dies without error, as seen here: dragon:/usr/local/apache/bin# apachectl start ././apachectl: kill: (31663) - No such pid ././apachectl start: httpd started dragon:/usr/local/apache/bin# apachectl start ././apachectl: kill: (31710) - No such pid ././apachectl start: httpd started It is apparently exiting normally: dragon:/usr/local/apache/bin# gdb httpd (gdb) run Starting program: /usr/local/apache/bin/httpd Program exited normally. I did a completely new install, even so far as resorting to the dist config file, with the same results. >How-To-Repeat: n/a >Fix: none >Release-Note: >Audit-Trail: State-Changed-From-To: open-feedback State-Changed-By: marc State-Changed-When: Sat Feb 13 13:54:06 PST 1999 State-Changed-Why: Is there anything in the error log? What does strace-ing httpd while starting it do? From: Gaven Cohen To: marc@apache.org Cc: apache-bugdb@apache.org, apbugs@apache.org Subject: Re: os-linux/3897: 1.3.4 server starts, seemingly normally... dies, no children, no errors not the case with 1.2.0 Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:41:31 +0200 (GMT+0200) Hi Marc, Thanks for the quick reply. On 13 Feb 1999 marc@apache.org wrote: > What does strace-ing httpd while starting it do? Alright, being more awake I decided to do an strace -f this time, which shows a segfault. I added in a sleep and gdb'd the child process (the detached parent) and it seems to be dying during the return from set_signals() called from standalone_main(): (gdb) info break Num Type Disp Enb Address What 1 breakpoint keep y 0x0807411e in set_signals at http_main.c:2794 2 breakpoint keep y 0x0807411e in set_signals at http_main.c:2797 3 breakpoint keep y 0x08075ec7 in standalone_main at http_main.c:4274 4 breakpoint keep y 0x08075ecc in standalone_main at http_main.c:4275 (gdb) continue Continuing. Breakpoint 3, standalone_main (argc=1, argv=0xbffffbe4) at http_main.c:4274 4274 set_signals(); (gdb) Continuing. Breakpoint 1, set_signals () at http_main.c:2797 2797 } (gdb) Continuing. Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x0 in ?? () (its not reaching line 4275, the first line after returning) something i forgot to mention previously is that 1.2.0 was compiled libc5, and 1.3.4 glibc. could this be a library problem? Thanks, Gaven ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gaven Cohen aka Kinslayer http://wastelands.net/ dragon@wastelands.net hkp://keys.pgp.com/0x2042AD07 freelance sysadmin/programmer linux, fantasy, female enthusiast ------------------------------------------------------------------------ RSA/1024: fingerprint 79 BC B3 3F E2 05 71 4B F7 C8 B2 45 EF 70 55 D1 Comment-Added-By: dgaudet Comment-Added-When: Tue Mar 16 08:54:14 PST 1999 Comment-Added: Yeah it could totally be a library problem. If you installed glibc over top a libc5 system I'd suspect the installation. If it's a fresh glibc system... dunno. I've never been happy with any attempts to make libc5 and glibc dev environments co-exist -- it's just not worth the headaches. Dean Comment-Added-By: dgaudet Comment-Added-When: Sat May 1 10:56:49 PDT 1999 Comment-Added: [This is a standard response.] This Apache problem report has not been updated recently. Please reply to this message if you have any additional information about this issue, or if you have answers to any questions that have been posed to you. If there are no outstanding questions, please consider this a request to try to reproduce the problem with the latest software release, if one has been made since last contact. If we don't hear from you, this report will be closed. If you have information to add, BE SURE to reply to this message and include the apbugs@Apache.Org address so it will be attached to the problem report! State-Changed-From-To: feedback-closed State-Changed-By: slive State-Changed-When: Mon Oct 30 18:56:16 PST 2000 State-Changed-Why: [This is a standard response.] No response from submitter, assuming issue has been resolved. >Unformatted: [In order for any reply to be added to the PR database, ] [you need to include in the Cc line ] [and leave the subject line UNCHANGED. This is not done] [automatically because of the potential for mail loops. ] [If you do not include this Cc, your reply may be ig- ] [nored unless you are responding to an explicit request ] [from a developer. ] [Reply only with text; DO NOT SEND ATTACHMENTS! ]