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

Bug#1014729: glibc 2.34 breaks wcc autopkgtest on amd64: open: Invalid argument



It looks like a no-change rebuild fixed this in Ubuntu fwiw.

On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 at 09:54, Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org> wrote:
Source: glibc, wcc
Control: found -1 glibc/2.34-0experimental4
Control: found -1 wcc/0.0.2+dfsg-4.1
Severity: important
Tags: experimental

Dear maintainers,

The autopkgtest of wcc fails in sid on amd64 when that autopkgtest is
run with the binary packages of glibc from experimental. It passes when
run with only packages from sid. In tabular form:

                       pass            fail
glibc                  from sid        2.34-0experimental4
wcc                    from sid        0.0.2+dfsg-4.1
all others             from sid        from sid

I copied some of the output at the bottom of this report.

Currently this regression is blocking the transition to glibc 2.34. Due
to the nature of this issue, I filed this bug report against both
packages. Can you please investigate the situation and reassign the bug
to the right package?

More information about this bug and the reason for filing it can be found on
https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation

Regards
Aurelien

https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/unstable/amd64/w/wcc/23455379/log.gz


autopkgtest [14:35:47]: test wsh-libs.wsh: [-----------------------
open: Invalid argument

[1;32m[SIGSEGV] Read    007000000101[1;34m        (address not mapped to object)
[0mbash: line 1:  2061 Segmentation fault      /tmp/autopkgtest-lxc.yfun0_rb/downtmp/build.xHo/src/debian/tests/wsh-libs.wsh 2> >(tee -a /tmp/autopkgtest-lxc.yfun0_rb/downtmp/wsh-libs.wsh-stderr >&2) > >(tee -a /tmp/autopkgtest-lxc.yfun0_rb/downtmp/wsh-libs.wsh-stdout)
autopkgtest [14:35:47]: test wsh-libs.wsh: -----------------------]
autopkgtest [14:35:47]: test wsh-libs.wsh:  - - - - - - - - - - results - - - - - - - - - -
wsh-libs.wsh         FAIL non-zero exit status 139

Reply to: