On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 12:49:59AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > At Sat, 22 Feb 2003 18:28:11 +0200 (EET), > Joonas Paalasmaa wrote: > > On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > > At Sat, 22 Feb 2003 10:06:04 +0200 (EET), > > > Joonas Paalasmaa wrote: > > > > On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > > > > At Fri, 21 Feb 2003 17:37:08 +0200, > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > When using libc6 2.3.1-11, screen of command "top" is drawn incorrectly, > > > > > > whereas when version 2.2.5-11.2 is used, top functions in the right way. > > > > > > With 2.2.5-11.2 the first line of top's output is not shown if the number > > > > > > of processes is so big that the list of them has to be truncated. > > > > > > > > > > <snipped> > > > > > > > > > > My procps (Version: 1:3.1.5-1) shows in the right way. > > > > > The top displays on my machine: > > > > > > > > > <correct top display snipped> > > > > > > > > > > Which version is your procps? It seems your version is old. > > > > > Did you upgrade only libc6? Many packages depends on libc6, so you > > > > > install many packages at the same time. > > > > > > > > > > I doubt it's libc6 problem. Please recheck, otherwise I close this bug. > > > > > > > > I upgraded procps from 1:2.0.7-8 to 1:3.1.5-1 and the problem disappeared. > > > > > > That's good. > > > > > > > Nevertheless, there is still some kid of a bug in libc6 2.3.1-11. > > > > I ran top 1:2.0.7-8 with chroot to check how it works with different > > > > libraries. With ld-linux.so.2 symlinked to ld-2.2.5.so and libc.so.6 symlinked > > > > to libc-2.2.5.so, top 1:2.0.7-8 functioned properly. Then I symlinked > > > > ld-linux.so.2 to ld-2.3.1.so and libc.so.6 to libc-2.3.1.so, and top 1:2.0.7-8 > > > > didn't show the first line anymore. > > > > > > I don't know why such problem is occured. > > > > > > I have a local build procps 1:2.0.6-5 (to investigate something), and > > > it works well. I retrive procps 1:2.0.7-8 from snapshot.debian.net, > > > (http://snapshot.debian.net/archive/2002/06/04/debian/pool/main/p/procps/) > > > then extract and use it on sid environment, it also works well: > > > > > > 00:01:06 up 15 days, 1:42, 28 users, load average: 0.10, 0.17, 0.11 > > > 174 processes: 173 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped > > > CPU states: 16.3% user, 1.3% system, 0.1% nice, 82.3% idle > > > Mem: 1031476K total, 1018908K used, 12568K free, 253108K buffers > > > Swap: 2048216K total, 169116K used, 1879100K free, 436480K cached > > > > > > PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND > > > <snip> > > > > > > I guess it's something other problem rather than glibc. Please recheck. > > > > To completely isolate the problem, I tested it once again with chroot > > and tarred all libraries I used in testing. The package can be downloaded > > at http://speedloop2000.com/libc6-test.tar.bz2 . Download the archive > > and issue the following commands, and you should see two kinds of top > > behaviour with different libc6 versions. At least on my computer, on > > virtual terminal. > > Thanks for your test case, but it works well... > > 15:45:58 up 13 days, 20:41, 0 users, load average: 0.31, 0.19, 0.07 > 76 processes: 75 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped > CPU states: 0.1% user, 0.2% system, 0.0% nice, 99.7% idle > Mem: 1034604K total, 1007512K used, 27092K free, 172804K buffers > Swap: 249944K total, 1696K used, 248248K free, 728224K cached > > Please check your environment variable especially $TERM (I checked > with "xterm" and "vt100"), $LANG (I checked with "C"), kernel version > (I checked with 2.4.19/2.5.59), etc...
He said he was using a virtual terminal, by which I assume he means a VC and TERM=linux. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
