Hi,

Thanks for sharing the log.

libcrypto.so isn't related on the segmentation fault. It's
just for relating to showing backtrace.

> perl: error while loading shared libraries: libcrypt.so.1:
> cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

This is happen at
https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/main/cpp/build-support/run-test.sh#L42
:

  TEST_NAME=$(echo $TEST_FILENAME | perl -pe 's/\..+?$//') # Remove path and 
extension (if any).

BTW, it seems that we should remove a Perl dependency from
https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/main/cpp/build-support/run-test.sh
...


I want to reproduce this problem on my environment. Could
you share your environment information? Did you use Manjaro
Linux this too?


Thanks,
-- 
kou


In <canva0dgkodpfde7_b8xuvmtkh5kdmzvmtpbofo82hqj17gu...@mail.gmail.com>
  "Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Arrow 12.0.0 - RC0" on Thu, 27 Apr 2023 23:54:58 
+0200,
  Jacob Wujciak <ja...@voltrondata.com.INVALID> wrote:

> I have uploaded the log [1] for the run using conda with gandiva active. It
> looks like there is an issue with libcrypt.so causing these tests to
> segfault.
> 
> 1: https://gist.github.com/assignUser/cba0a13875de9d6a4f31000f585244f0
> 
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 11:32 PM Will Jones <will.jones...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Raul,
>>
>> It might be worth creating a new RC that fixes more of the test issues,
>> even if they shouldn't be blockers. I've run the release script a few
>> different times, and after 1.5 hours (is that a normal runtime for
>> verification?) I get various test failures. So far the errors are in the
>> TEST_PYTHON, TEST_WHEELS, and TEST_JAVA. I'll have more time tomorrow to
>> look at the failures I am seeing.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 8:09 AM Raúl Cumplido <raulcumpl...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > The vote for the RC has been open for 5 days.
>> >
>> > I will wait until tomorrow, if no more +1 votes are casted I
>> > understand that the issue related to the pandas failures
>> > (https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/35321) is causing verification
>> > to fail and we require a new RC with the above fix.
>> >
>> > Let me know if there are other blockers that should be included in that
>> > case.
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> > Raúl
>> >
>> > El jue, 27 abr 2023 a las 16:08, Sutou Kouhei (<k...@clear-code.com>)
>> > escribió:
>> > >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I tried this on a manjarolinux/base Docker image.
>> > >
>> > > I think that this is a problem of the Arch Linux's llvm
>> > > package. LLVMExports.cmake in the package doesn't provide
>> > > the LLVMX86CodeGen target:
>> > >
>> > > # grep add_library /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVMExports.cmake
>> > > add_library(LLVMDemangle STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVMSupport STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVMTableGen STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LTO SHARED IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVMgold MODULE IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVM SHARED IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(Remarks SHARED IMPORTED)
>> > >
>> > > FYI: LLVMExports.cmake on Debian GNU/Linux provides many
>> > > targets:
>> > >
>> > > $ grep add_library /usr/lib/llvm-15/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVMExports.cmake |
>> > head
>> > > add_library(LLVMDemangle STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVMSupport STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVMTableGen STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVMTableGenGlobalISel STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVMCore STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVMFuzzerCLI STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVMFuzzMutate STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVMFileCheck STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVMInterfaceStub STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > > add_library(LLVMIRReader STATIC IMPORTED)
>> > >
>> > > $ grep add_library /usr/lib/llvm-15/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVMExports.cmake |
>> > wc -l
>> > > 195
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > --
>> > > kou
>> > >
>> > > In <CANva0dgrkkaAb_dbnSLXuVxi=h22i0yjhbtde-y3-rflox8...@mail.gmail.com
>> >
>> > >   "Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Arrow 12.0.0 - RC0" on Tue, 25 Apr 2023
>> > 23:50:21 +0200,
>> > >   Jacob Wujciak <ja...@voltrondata.com.INVALID> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I checked out a trace for the cmake issue and LLVM 15.07 is found
>> > > > correctly. The issue come from `llvm_map_components_to_libnames`
>> which
>> > > > complains about X86 not being in the lsit of libraries. But we don't
>> > add
>> > > > that but rather it gets appended in the function?
>> > > >
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(228):
>> > > >  get_property(LLVM_TARGETS_CONFIGURED GLOBAL PROPERTY
>> > > > LLVM_TARGETS_CONFIGURED )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(234):  if(NOT
>> > LLVM_TARGETS_CONFIGURED
>> > > > )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(244):  list(FIND
>> > > > LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD X86 have_native_backend )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(245):  list(FIND
>> link_components
>> > > > engine engine_required )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(246):  if(NOT engine_required
>> > EQUAL
>> > > > -1 )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(255):  list(FIND
>> link_components
>> > > > native native_required )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(256):  if(NOT native_required
>> > EQUAL
>> > > > -1 )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(257):  if(NOT
>> have_native_backend
>> > > > EQUAL -1 )
>> > > > */usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(258):  list(APPEND
>> > link_components
>> > > > X86 )*
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(263):
>> > > >  llvm_expand_pseudo_components(link_components
>> > > >
>> >
>> core;mcjit;native;ipo;bitreader;target;linker;analysis;debuginfodwarf;X86 )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(127):  set(link_components
>> > > >
>> >
>> core;mcjit;native;ipo;bitreader;target;linker;analysis;debuginfodwarf;X86 )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(128):  foreach(c
>> > > >
>> >
>> core;mcjit;native;ipo;bitreader;target;linker;analysis;debuginfodwarf;X86 )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(130):  list(FIND
>> > > > LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD core idx )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(131):  if(NOT idx LESS 0 )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(159):  elseif(c STREQUAL
>> > > > nativecodegen )
>> > > > [snip]
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(212):  list(APPEND
>> > > > expanded_components debuginfodwarf )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(130):  list(FIND
>> > > > LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD X86 idx )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(131):  if(NOT idx LESS 0 )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(132):  if(TARGET
>> LLVMX86CodeGen )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(134):  else()
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(135):  if(TARGET LLVMX86 )
>> > > > /usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(137):  else()
>> > > > */usr/lib/cmake/llvm/LLVM-Config.cmake(138):  message(FATAL_ERROR
>> > Target
>> > > > X86 is not in the set of libraries. )*
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 10:57 AM Raúl Cumplido <
>> raulcumpl...@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> I have created the following issue for the new wheels test failure
>> > > >> around pandas 2.0.1 : https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/35321
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I don't think we should create a new RC for that issue but I'm happy
>> > > >> to know other people's thoughts around that.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> El lun, 24 abr 2023 a las 21:12, Raúl Cumplido
>> > > >> (<raulcumpl...@gmail.com>) escribió:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > El lun, 24 abr 2023 a las 18:53, Will Jones
>> > > >> > (<will.jones...@gmail.com>) escribió:
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > I'm seeing failing Pandas tests in PyArrow when verifying with
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > USE_CONDA=1 dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh 12.0.0 0
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >>
>> >
>> pyarrow/tests/test_extension_type.py::test_extension_to_pandas_storage_type[registered_period_type0]
>> > > >> > > - NotImplementedError: extension<test.period<PeriodType>>
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > This is also happening on our nightlies from today:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> >
>> https://github.com/ursacomputing/crossbow/actions/runs/4786502455/jobs/8510514881
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > There has been a new pandas release: 2.0.1 around 9 hours ago
>> which
>> > > >> > seems to be the causing issue:
>> > > >> > https://pypi.org/project/pandas/#history
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > No one else is getting that?
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > On Sun, Apr 23, 2023 at 9:21 AM Raúl Cumplido <
>> > raulcumpl...@gmail.com>
>> > > >> > > wrote:
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > +1 (non binding)
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > I have tested both SOURCES and BINARIES successfully with:
>> > > >> > > > TEST_DEFAULT=0 TEST_SOURCE=1
>> > dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh
>> > > >> > > > 12.0.0 0
>> > > >> > > > TEST_DEFAULT=0 TEST_WHEELS=1
>> > dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh
>> > > >> > > > 12.0.0 0
>> > > >> > > > TEST_DEFAULT=0 TEST_BINARIES=1
>> > > >> dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh
>> > > >> > > > 12.0.0 0
>> > > >> > > > with:
>> > > >> > > >   * Python 3.10.6
>> > > >> > > >   * gcc (Ubuntu 11.3.0-1ubuntu1~22.04) 11.3.0
>> > > >> > > >   * NVIDIA CUDA cuda_11.5.r11.5/compiler.30672275_0
>> > > >> > > >   * openjdk version "17.0.6" 2023-01-17
>> > > >> > > >   * ruby 3.0.2p107 (2021-07-07 revision 0db68f0233)
>> > > >> [x86_64-linux-gnu]
>> > > >> > > >   * dotnet 7.0.203
>> > > >> > > >   * Ubuntu 22.04 LTS
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > El dom, 23 abr 2023 a las 12:59, Yibo Cai (<yibo....@arm.com
>> >)
>> > > >> escribió:
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > +1
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > I ran the followings on Ubuntu-22.04, aarch64.
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > TEST_DEFAULT=0 \
>> > > >> > > > >    TEST_CPP=1 \
>> > > >> > > > >    TEST_PYTHON=1 \
>> > > >> > > > >    TEST_GO=1 \
>> > > >> > > > >    dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh 12.0.0 0
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > TEST_DEFAULT=0 \
>> > > >> > > > >    TEST_WHEELS=1 \
>> > > >> > > > >    dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh 12.0.0 0
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > On 4/23/23 14:40, Sutou Kouhei wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > > +1
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > I ran the followings on Debian GNU/Linux sid:
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >    * TEST_DEFAULT=0 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        TEST_SOURCE=1 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        LANG=C \
>> > > >> > > > > >        TZ=UTC \
>> > > >> > > > > >        CUDAToolkit_ROOT=/usr \
>> > > >> > > > > >        ARROW_CMAKE_OPTIONS="-DBoost_NO_BOOST_CMAKE=ON
>> > > >> > > > -Dxsimd_SOURCE=BUNDLED" \
>> > > >> > > > > >        dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh 12.0.0 0
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >    * TEST_DEFAULT=0 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        TEST_APT=1 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        LANG=C \
>> > > >> > > > > >        dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh 12.0.0 0
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >    * TEST_DEFAULT=0 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        TEST_BINARY=1 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        LANG=C \
>> > > >> > > > > >        dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh 12.0.0 0
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >    * TEST_DEFAULT=0 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        TEST_JARS=1 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        LANG=C \
>> > > >> > > > > >        dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh 12.0.0 0
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >    * TEST_DEFAULT=0 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        TEST_PYTHON_VERSIONS=3.11 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        TEST_WHEELS=1 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        LANG=C \
>> > > >> > > > > >        dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh 12.0.0 0
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >    * TEST_DEFAULT=0 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        TEST_YUM=1 \
>> > > >> > > > > >        LANG=C \
>> > > >> > > > > >        dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh 12.0.0 0
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > with:
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >    * .NET SDK (6.0.406)
>> > > >> > > > > >    * Python 3.11.2
>> > > >> > > > > >    * gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0
>> > > >> > > > > >    * nvidia-cuda-dev 11.7.99~11.7.1-4
>> > > >> > > > > >    * openjdk version "17.0.6" 2023-01-17
>> > > >> > > > > >    * ruby 3.1.2p20 (2022-04-12 revision 4491bb740a)
>> > > >> [x86_64-linux-gnu]
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > Thanks,
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >>
>> >
>>

Reply via email to