Bug#441958: locales: 'EOF on stdin at conffile prompt' on noninteractive update
Package: locales Version: 2.6.1-3 Severity: normal the following code snippet # one of dialog|noninteractive|readline| export DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive # one of low|medium|high|critical export DEBIAN_PRIORITY=high [...] apt-get -fuy upgrade || errcnt=$? lead to the following error message: Setting up locales (2.6.1-3) ... Configuration file `/etc/locale.alias' == File on system created by you or by a script. == File also in package provided by package maintainer. What would you like to do about it ? Your options are: Y or I : install the package maintainer's version N or O : keep your currently-installed version D : show the differences between the versions Z : background this process to examine the situation The default action is to keep your current version. *** locale.alias (Y/I/N/O/D/Z) [default=N] ? dpkg: error processing locales (--configure): EOF on stdin at conffile prompt Setting up aspell-de (20070829-3) ... -- System Information: Debian Release: lenny/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (990, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing-proposed-updates'), (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.22.6-tkn-piv-2 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=C, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (charmap=ISO-8859-15) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Versions of packages locales depends on: ii debconf [debconf-2.0] 1.5.14 Debian configuration management sy ii libc6 [glibc-2.6-1] 2.6.1-3GNU C Library: Shared libraries locales recommends no packages. -- debconf information: * locales/default_environment_locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * locales/locales_to_be_generated: de_DE.UTF-8 UTF-8, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ISO-8859-15, en_US ISO-8859-1, [EMAIL PROTECTED] UTF-8, en_GB ISO-8859-1, en_GB.ISO-8859-15 ISO-8859-15, en_GB.UTF-8 UTF-8, en_IE ISO-8859-1, en_IE.UTF-8 UTF-8, [EMAIL PROTECTED] UTF-8, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ISO-8859-15, en_US.ISO-8859-15 ISO-8859-15, en_US.UTF-8 UTF-8 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#441959: sysmacros.h no longer compatibile with -ansi
Package: libc6-dev
Version: 2.6.1-3
Severity: important
Compiling this simple program:
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include sys/types.h
int main (void) { return 0; }
with gcc -ansi results in:
In file included from /usr/include/sys/types.h:223,
from example.c:2:
/usr/include/sys/sysmacros.h:65: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or
'__attribute__' before 'unsigned'
/usr/include/sys/sysmacros.h:71: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or
'__attribute__' before 'unsigned'
/usr/include/sys/sysmacros.h:77: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or
'__attribute__' before 'unsigned'
Simple fix is to change inline to __inline for the 3 new inline
functions added in local-sysmacros.diff.
-Yosh
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#441026: Needs another fix
fi_FI locale is not yet correct in 2.6.3-1, perhaps because my patch was not in the standard form (I haven't sent patches before)? I thought the patch was correct, since it fixed my fi_FI correctly and it shows enough context to identify the correct line to be changed. After installing and compiling locale fi_FI from locales 2.6.3-1, I still get $ echo w | LC_ALL=fi_FI grep [a-z] $ echo a | LC_ALL=fi_FI grep [a-z] a The change from U016A to U016B has been applied to the wrong line in fi_FI. The correct line is just before small-caps v and w, i.e. at reorder-after U016A U0076 v;U0056;BAS;MIN In locales 2.6.3-1, the change has been applied at reorder-after U016A U0056 v;U0056;BAS;CAP I'll attach my correctly working /usr/share/i18n/locales/fi_FI in order to avoid any misunderstandings. -- Petteri fi_FI Description: Binary data
Bug#441975: cannot upgrade libc6-2.6.1-3 if libc6-i686 is installed
Package: libc6 Version: 2.6.1-3 Severity: important --- Please enter the report below this line. --- Today, I tried to upgrade my system using apt-get upgrade. I got this error message. Setting up libc6 (2.6.1-3) ... dpkg: error processing libc6 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script killed by signal (Segmentation fault) dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libc6-dev: libc6-dev depends on libc6 (= 2.6.1-3); however: Package libc6 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libc6-dev (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libc6 libc6-dev I solved the problem by first removing libc6-i686, then upgrade libc6 and then reinstall libc6-i686. Hope this help. Thanks for your work --- System information. --- Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux 2.6.22-2-k7 Debian Release: lenny/sid 900 unstablewww.debian-multimedia.org 900 unstableftp.fr.debian.org 500 testing security.debian.org 500 testing ftp.fr.debian.org 500 kernel-dists-trunk kernel-archive.buildserver.net 1 stable security.debian.org 1 stable ftp.fr.debian.org 1 experimentalwww.debian-multimedia.org 1 experimentalftp.fr.debian.org --- Package information. --- Depends (Version) | Installed ===-+-=== libgcc1 | 1:4.2.1-5 -- Gallien Matthieu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#441975: cannot upgrade libc6-2.6.1-3 if libc6-i686 is installed
Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Package: libc6 Version: 2.6.1-3 Severity: important --- Please enter the report below this line. --- Today, I tried to upgrade my system using apt-get upgrade. I got this error message. Setting up libc6 (2.6.1-3) ... dpkg: error processing libc6 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script killed by signal (Segmentation fault) dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libc6-dev: libc6-dev depends on libc6 (= 2.6.1-3); however: Package libc6 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libc6-dev (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libc6 libc6-dev I solved the problem by first removing libc6-i686, then upgrade libc6 and then reinstall libc6-i686. This is most probably a problem from your side. Which version of libc6 and libc6-i686 was installed before? Also did you move at some point /lib/tls to /lib/tls.old or something like that? -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `-people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#441975: cannot upgrade libc6-2.6.1-3 if libc6-i686 is installed
Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 14:54:23 Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Package: libc6 Version: 2.6.1-3 Severity: important --- Please enter the report below this line. --- Today, I tried to upgrade my system using apt-get upgrade. I got this error message. Setting up libc6 (2.6.1-3) ... dpkg: error processing libc6 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script killed by signal (Segmentation fault) dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libc6-dev: libc6-dev depends on libc6 (= 2.6.1-3); however: Package libc6 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libc6-dev (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libc6 libc6-dev I solved the problem by first removing libc6-i686, then upgrade libc6 and then reinstall libc6-i686. This is most probably a problem from your side. Which version of libc6 and libc6-i686 was installed before? I can reproduce with version 2.6.1-2 and testing. Also did you move at some point /lib/tls to /lib/tls.old or something like that? I have no /lib/tls nor any /lib/tls.* . I for sure never removed them, so I have not enough knowledge to understand what I should have. -- Gallien Matthieu
Bug#441975: cannot upgrade libc6-2.6.1-3 if libc6-i686 is installed
Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 14:54:23 Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Package: libc6 Version: 2.6.1-3 Severity: important --- Please enter the report below this line. --- Today, I tried to upgrade my system using apt-get upgrade. I got this error message. Setting up libc6 (2.6.1-3) ... dpkg: error processing libc6 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script killed by signal (Segmentation fault) dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libc6-dev: libc6-dev depends on libc6 (= 2.6.1-3); however: Package libc6 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libc6-dev (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libc6 libc6-dev I solved the problem by first removing libc6-i686, then upgrade libc6 and then reinstall libc6-i686. This is most probably a problem from your side. Which version of libc6 and libc6-i686 was installed before? I can reproduce with version 2.6.1-2 and testing. You mean you are still able to reproduce it even after the upgrade? -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `-people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#441975: cannot upgrade libc6-2.6.1-3 if libc6-i686 is installed
Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 17:15:11 Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 14:54:23 Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Package: libc6 Version: 2.6.1-3 Severity: important --- Please enter the report below this line. --- Today, I tried to upgrade my system using apt-get upgrade. I got this error message. Setting up libc6 (2.6.1-3) ... dpkg: error processing libc6 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script killed by signal (Segmentation fault) dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libc6-dev: libc6-dev depends on libc6 (= 2.6.1-3); however: Package libc6 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libc6-dev (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libc6 libc6-dev I solved the problem by first removing libc6-i686, then upgrade libc6 and then reinstall libc6-i686. This is most probably a problem from your side. Which version of libc6 and libc6-i686 was installed before? I can reproduce with version 2.6.1-2 and testing. You mean you are still able to reproduce it even after the upgrade? If I downgrade, I am still able to reproduce it. -- Gallien Matthieu
Processed: tagging 441959
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.26 tags 441959 + pending Bug#441959: sysmacros.h no longer compatibile with -ansi There were no tags set. Tags added: pending End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#441975: cannot upgrade libc6-2.6.1-3 if libc6-i686 is installed
Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 17:15:11 Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 14:54:23 Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Package: libc6 Version: 2.6.1-3 Severity: important --- Please enter the report below this line. --- Today, I tried to upgrade my system using apt-get upgrade. I got this error message. Setting up libc6 (2.6.1-3) ... dpkg: error processing libc6 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script killed by signal (Segmentation fault) dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libc6-dev: libc6-dev depends on libc6 (= 2.6.1-3); however: Package libc6 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libc6-dev (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libc6 libc6-dev I solved the problem by first removing libc6-i686, then upgrade libc6 and then reinstall libc6-i686. This is most probably a problem from your side. Which version of libc6 and libc6-i686 was installed before? I can reproduce with version 2.6.1-2 and testing. You mean you are still able to reproduce it even after the upgrade? If I downgrade, I am still able to reproduce it. Interesting. Then could you please send us the output of: - ls -l /lib /lib/i686/cmov - ls /etc/ld.so.* - cat /etc/ld.so.conf - dpkg -l libc6* Thanks. -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `-people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: reopening 441026
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.26 reopen 441026 Bug#441026: fi_FI locale possibly breaks grep, patch suggested 'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version; you may need to use 'found' to remove fixed versions. Bug reopened, originator not changed. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
r2556 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . patches/any
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-09-12 15:29:09 + (Wed, 12 Sep 2007)
New Revision: 2556
Modified:
glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog
glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/any/local-sysmacros.diff
Log:
* any/local-sysmacros.diff: use __inline instead of inline for
compatibility with ANSI. Closes: #441959.
Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog
===
--- glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog2007-09-11 14:18:07 UTC (rev
2555)
+++ glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog2007-09-12 15:29:09 UTC (rev
2556)
@@ -1,9 +1,11 @@
glibc (2.6.1-4) unstable; urgency=low
- * Disable any/local-ipv6-lookup.diff as it is causing breakages.
+ * Disable any/local-ipv6-lookup.diff as it is causing breakages.
Closes: bug#441857.
+ * any/local-sysmacros.diff: use __inline instead of inline for
+compatibility with ANSI. Closes: #441959.
- -- Aurelien Jarno [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue, 11 Sep 2007 16:17:11 +0200
+ -- Aurelien Jarno [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed, 12 Sep 2007 17:28:09 +0200
glibc (2.6.1-3) unstable; urgency=low
Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/any/local-sysmacros.diff
===
--- glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/any/local-sysmacros.diff 2007-09-11
14:18:07 UTC (rev 2555)
+++ glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/any/local-sysmacros.diff 2007-09-12
15:29:09 UTC (rev 2556)
@@ -7,19 +7,19 @@
-# define major(dev) gnu_dev_major (dev)
-# define minor(dev) gnu_dev_minor (dev)
-# define makedev(maj, min) gnu_dev_makedev (maj, min)
-+static inline unsigned int
++static __inline unsigned int
+__NTH (major (unsigned long long int dev))
+{
+ return gnu_dev_major (dev);
+}
+
-+static inline unsigned int
++static __inline unsigned int
+__NTH (minor (unsigned long long int dev))
+{
+ return gnu_dev_minor (dev);
+}
+
-+static inline unsigned long long int
++static __inline unsigned long long int
+__NTH (makedev (unsigned int maj, unsigned int min))
+{
+ return gnu_dev_makedev (maj, min);
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: tagging 441026
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.26 tags 441026 + pending Bug#441026: fi_FI locale possibly breaks grep, patch suggested There were no tags set. Tags added: pending End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
r2557 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . patches/localedata
Author: aurel32 Date: 2007-09-12 15:47:45 + (Wed, 12 Sep 2007) New Revision: 2557 Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/localedata/tailor-iso14651_t1.diff Log: * patches/localedata/tailor-iso14651_t1.diff: correctly fix fi_FI locale. Closes: bug#441026. Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog === --- glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog2007-09-12 15:29:09 UTC (rev 2556) +++ glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog2007-09-12 15:47:45 UTC (rev 2557) @@ -2,10 +2,12 @@ * Disable any/local-ipv6-lookup.diff as it is causing breakages. Closes: bug#441857. - * any/local-sysmacros.diff: use __inline instead of inline for + * any/local-sysmacros.diff: use __inline instead of inline for compatibility with ANSI. Closes: #441959. + * patches/localedata/tailor-iso14651_t1.diff: correctly fix fi_FI +locale. Closes: bug#441026. - -- Aurelien Jarno [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed, 12 Sep 2007 17:28:09 +0200 + -- Aurelien Jarno [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed, 12 Sep 2007 17:47:21 +0200 glibc (2.6.1-3) unstable; urgency=low Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/localedata/tailor-iso14651_t1.diff === --- glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/localedata/tailor-iso14651_t1.diff 2007-09-12 15:29:09 UTC (rev 2556) +++ glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/localedata/tailor-iso14651_t1.diff 2007-09-12 15:47:45 UTC (rev 2557) @@ -2224,7 +2224,8 @@ +U01FE o-diaerisis;U01FF;CAP;IGNORE U00D5 o-diaerisis;TIL;CAP;IGNORE - reorder-after U016A +-reorder-after U016A ++reorder-after U016B U0076 v;U0056;BAS;MIN -U0056 v;U0056;BAS;CAP U1E7D v;U0056;TIL;MIN @@ -2240,7 +2241,7 @@ U1E85 w;U0057;REU;MIN -U1E84 w;U0057;REU;CAP U1E87 w;U0057;PCT;MIN -+reorder-after U016B ++reorder-after U016A +U0056 v;U0056;BAS;CAP +U1E7C v;U0056;TIL;CAP +U0057 w;U0057;BAS;CAP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#441958: locales: 'EOF on stdin at conffile prompt' on noninteractive update
Michael Eyrich a écrit : Package: locales Version: 2.6.1-3 Severity: normal the following code snippet # one of dialog|noninteractive|readline| export DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive # one of low|medium|high|critical export DEBIAN_PRIORITY=high [...] apt-get -fuy upgrade || errcnt=$? lead to the following error message: Setting up locales (2.6.1-3) ... Configuration file `/etc/locale.alias' == File on system created by you or by a script. == File also in package provided by package maintainer. What would you like to do about it ? Your options are: Y or I : install the package maintainer's version N or O : keep your currently-installed version D : show the differences between the versions Z : background this process to examine the situation The default action is to keep your current version. *** locale.alias (Y/I/N/O/D/Z) [default=N] ? dpkg: error processing locales (--configure): EOF on stdin at conffile prompt Setting up aspell-de (20070829-3) ... Strange error, probably not in locales. Are you upgrading from a script? -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `-people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#441975: cannot upgrade libc6-2.6.1-3 if libc6-i686 is installed
Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 17:54:43 Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 17:33:41, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 17:15:11 Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 14:54:23 Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Package: libc6 Version: 2.6.1-3 Severity: important --- Please enter the report below this line. --- Today, I tried to upgrade my system using apt-get upgrade. I got this error message. Setting up libc6 (2.6.1-3) ... dpkg: error processing libc6 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script killed by signal (Segmentation fault) dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libc6-dev: libc6-dev depends on libc6 (= 2.6.1-3); however: Package libc6 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libc6-dev (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libc6 libc6-dev I solved the problem by first removing libc6-i686, then upgrade libc6 and then reinstall libc6-i686. This is most probably a problem from your side. Which version of libc6 and libc6-i686 was installed before? I can reproduce with version 2.6.1-2 and testing. You mean you are still able to reproduce it even after the upgrade? If I downgrade, I am still able to reproduce it. Interesting. Then could you please send us the output of: - ls -l /lib /lib/i686/cmov Everything looks ok. Do you have something in /lib/i686/cmov (files from libc6-i686) ? I see nothing listed. Sure, I made a mistake and send only the content of /lib/i686/cmov and not those of /lib /lib: total 5820 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root4096 Jun 27 22:38 alsa lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 Sep 5 19:15 cpp - /etc/alternatives/cpp drwxr-xr-x 4 root root4096 Jul 30 07:38 cryptsetup drwxr-xr-x 2 root root4096 Aug 10 19:54 discover drwxr-xr-x 2 root root4096 Nov 25 2005 firmware drwxr-xr-x 2 root root4096 Mar 2 2006 i486-linux-gnu drwxr-xr-x 3 root root4096 Sep 12 15:32 i686 drwxr-xr-x 3 root root4096 Jul 30 07:38 init drwxr-xr-x 2 root root8192 Jul 30 07:38 iptables -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 64496 Sep 4 13:36 klibc-T3tjPzYAN-AkKlc3Efm8yNoXldY.so -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 117340 Sep 11 09:27 ld-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 11 Sep 12 15:23 ld-linux.so.2 - ld-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root5444 Sep 11 09:27 libBrokenLocale-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Sep 12 15:23 libBrokenLocale.so.1 - libBrokenLocale-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13696 Sep 11 09:27 libSegFault.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 Dec 18 2006 libacl.a - /usr/lib/libacl.a lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Dec 18 2006 libacl.la - /usr/lib/libacl.la lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 11 Dec 18 2006 libacl.so - libacl.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Dec 18 2006 libacl.so.1 - libacl.so.1.1.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 22156 Dec 17 2006 libacl.so.1.1.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root9804 Sep 11 09:27 libanl-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Sep 12 15:23 libanl.so.1 - libanl-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Jul 22 17:09 libatm.so.1 - libatm.so.1.0.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 31156 Jul 21 13:55 libatm.so.1.0.0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Jul 30 07:45 libattr.a - /usr/lib/libattr.a lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 Jul 30 07:45 libattr.la - /usr/lib/libattr.la lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Jul 30 07:45 libattr.so - libattr.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Jul 30 07:38 libattr.so.1 - libattr.so.1.1.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12628 Jul 28 18:18 libattr.so.1.1.0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Jul 17 12:10 libblkid.so.1 - libblkid.so.1.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 32368 Jul 14 15:06 libblkid.so.1.0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 May 21 19:03 libbz2.so.1 - libbz2.so.1.0.3 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 May 21 19:03 libbz2.so.1.0 - libbz2.so.1.0.3 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 66276 May 21 07:44 libbz2.so.1.0.3 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1335536 Sep 11 09:27 libc-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 Sep 12 15:23 libc.so.6 - libc-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 14 Mar 23 2005 libcap.so.1 - libcap.so.1.10 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 11024 Apr 14 2004 libcap.so.1.10 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 Sep 6 2006 libcfont.so.0 - libcfont.so.0.0.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10644 Sep 5 2006 libcfont.so.0.0.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 185824 Sep 11 09:27 libcidn-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Sep 12 15:23 libcidn.so.1 - libcidn-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 Jul 17 12:10 libcom_err.so.2 - libcom_err.so.2.1 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root6696 Jul 14 15:06 libcom_err.so.2.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 Sep 6 2006 libconsole.so.0 - libconsole.so.0.0.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 73540 Sep 5 2006 libconsole.so.0.0.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 21912 Sep 11 09:27 libcrypt-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1
Bug#441975: cannot upgrade libc6-2.6.1-3 if libc6-i686 is installed
Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 17:33:41, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 17:15:11 Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Le Wednesday 12 September 2007 14:54:23 Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : Gallien Matthieu a écrit : Package: libc6 Version: 2.6.1-3 Severity: important --- Please enter the report below this line. --- Today, I tried to upgrade my system using apt-get upgrade. I got this error message. Setting up libc6 (2.6.1-3) ... dpkg: error processing libc6 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script killed by signal (Segmentation fault) dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libc6-dev: libc6-dev depends on libc6 (= 2.6.1-3); however: Package libc6 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libc6-dev (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libc6 libc6-dev I solved the problem by first removing libc6-i686, then upgrade libc6 and then reinstall libc6-i686. This is most probably a problem from your side. Which version of libc6 and libc6-i686 was installed before? I can reproduce with version 2.6.1-2 and testing. You mean you are still able to reproduce it even after the upgrade? If I downgrade, I am still able to reproduce it. Interesting. Then could you please send us the output of: - ls -l /lib /lib/i686/cmov -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 117340 Sep 11 09:28 ld-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 11 Sep 12 15:32 ld-linux.so.2 - ld-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root5444 Sep 11 09:28 libBrokenLocale-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Sep 12 15:32 libBrokenLocale.so.1 - libBrokenLocale-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13696 Sep 11 09:28 libSegFault.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root9804 Sep 11 09:28 libanl-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Sep 12 15:32 libanl.so.1 - libanl-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1335720 Sep 11 09:28 libc-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 Sep 12 15:32 libc.so.6 - libc-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 185824 Sep 11 09:28 libcidn-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Sep 12 15:32 libcidn.so.1 - libcidn-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 21912 Sep 11 09:28 libcrypt-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 Sep 12 15:32 libcrypt.so.1 - libcrypt-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root9684 Sep 11 09:28 libdl-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 14 Sep 12 15:32 libdl.so.2 - libdl-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 149332 Sep 11 09:28 libm-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 Sep 12 15:32 libm.so.6 - libm-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13692 Sep 11 09:28 libmemusage.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 83712 Sep 11 09:28 libnsl-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Sep 12 15:32 libnsl.so.1 - libnsl-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 30436 Sep 11 09:28 libnss_compat-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 22 Sep 12 15:32 libnss_compat.so.2 - libnss_compat-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 17884 Sep 11 09:28 libnss_dns-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 Sep 12 15:32 libnss_dns.so.2 - libnss_dns-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 38420 Sep 11 09:28 libnss_files-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 Sep 12 15:32 libnss_files.so.2 - libnss_files-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 17900 Sep 11 09:28 libnss_hesiod-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 22 Sep 12 15:32 libnss_hesiod.so.2 - libnss_hesiod-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 34352 Sep 11 09:28 libnss_nis-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 Sep 12 15:32 libnss_nis.so.2 - libnss_nis-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 46604 Sep 11 09:28 libnss_nisplus-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 23 Sep 12 15:32 libnss_nisplus.so.2 - libnss_nisplus-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root5444 Sep 11 09:28 libpcprofile.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 112423 Sep 11 09:28 libpthread-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 Sep 12 15:32 libpthread.so.0 - libpthread-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 67408 Sep 11 09:28 libresolv-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Sep 12 15:32 libresolv.so.2 - libresolv-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 30624 Sep 11 09:28 librt-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 14 Sep 12 15:32 librt.so.1 - librt-2.6.1.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 26276 Sep 11 09:28 libthread_db-1.0.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 Sep 12 15:32 libthread_db.so.1 - libthread_db-1.0.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root root9700 Sep 11 09:28 libutil-2.6.1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Sep 12 15:32 libutil.so.1 - libutil-2.6.1.so - ls /etc/ld.so.* /etc/ld.so.cache /etc/ld.so.conf /etc/ld.so.conf.d: i486-linux-gnu.conf libc.conf - cat /etc/ld.so.conf /usr/lib/ include /etc/ld.so.conf.d/*.conf - dpkg -l libc6* ii libc6 2.6.1-3 GNU C Library: Shared libraries un libc6-dbg none (no description available) ii libc6-dev
nscd weird Problem
Hello, i use debian etch with nscd to cache dns lookups: - libc6 2.3.6.ds1-13et - nscd 2.3.6.ds1-13et Nameserver: 10.204.1.9 - this one is not available 10.204.1.10 1. if all dns servers in resolv.conf are available the entries got cached to hosts cache but statistics show cache rate 0% /var/log/nscd.log 1690: handle_request: request received (Version = 2) from PID 1700 1690: GETHOSTBYADDR (10.204.1.45) 1690: Haven't found 10.204.1.45 in hosts cache! 1690: add new entry 10.204.1.45 of type GETHOSTBYADDR for hosts to cache (firs t) 1690: handle_request: request received (Version = 2) from PID 1701 1690: GETSTAT 1690: handle_request: request received (Version = 2) from PID 1702 1690: GETFDHST 1690: provide access to FD 9, for hosts 1690: handle_request: request received (Version = 2) from PID 1704 1690: GETFDHST 1690: provide access to FD 9, for hosts 1690: handle_request: request received (Version = 2) from PID 1705 1690: GETFDHST 1690: provide access to FD 9, for hosts 1690: handle_request: request received (Version = 2) from PID 1706 1690: GETSTAT 1690: Reloading 101 in password cache! 1690: Reloading 102 in password cache! 1690: handle_request: request received (Version = 2) from PID 1708 1690: GETFDPW 1690: provide access to FD 5, for passwd /var/log/nscd.log hosts cache: yes cache is enabled yes cache is persistent yes cache is shared 211 suggested size 216064 total data pool size 496 used data pool size 3600 seconds time to live for positive entries 20 seconds time to live for negative entries 0 cache hits on positive entries 0 cache hits on negative entries 26 cache misses on positive entries 4 cache misses on negative entries 0% cache hit rate 4 current number of cached values 10 maximum number of cached values 0 maximum chain length searched 0 number of delays on rdlock 0 number of delays on wrlock 0 memory allocations failed yes check /etc/hosts for changes So Cache seams to work but statistics no. 2. if the first namesever is unavaiable, the cache doesnt wort anymore. 1690: handle_request: request received (Version = 2) from PID 1714 1690: GETFDHST 1690: provide access to FD 9, for hosts 1690: handle_request: request received (Version = 2) from PID 1714 1690: GETHOSTBYNAME (bi1bea3) 1690: Haven't found bi1bea3 in hosts cache! 1690: add new entry bi1bea3 of type GETHOSTBYNAME for hosts to cache (first) 1690: short write in cache_addhst: Broken pipe tcpdump shows, that every dns request is made to all dns servers in /etc/resolv.conf. Cache says, that the entry is there. but on every request a new dns lookup is made. -- tcpdump --- 21:24:11.252449 IP 10.204.1.10.53 10.204.4.187.1366: 32413* 2/0/0 PTR[|domain] 21:24:11.254883 IP 10.204.4.187.1366 10.204.1.9.53: 15589+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:16.260741 IP 10.204.4.187.1367 10.204.1.10.53: 15589+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:16.262204 IP 10.204.1.10.53 10.204.4.187.1367: 15589* 2/0/0 PTR[|domain] 21:24:16.264647 IP 10.204.4.187.1367 10.204.1.9.53: 40656+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:21.261134 IP 10.204.4.187.1368 10.204.1.10.53: 40656+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:21.262520 IP 10.204.1.10.53 10.204.4.187.1368: 40656* 2/0/0 PTR[|domain] 21:24:21.265076 IP 10.204.4.187.1368 10.204.1.9.53: 54744+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:26.261597 IP 10.204.4.187.1369 10.204.1.10.53: 54744+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:26.262959 IP 10.204.1.10.53 10.204.4.187.1369: 54744* 2/0/0 PTR[|domain] 21:24:26.265426 IP 10.204.4.187.1369 10.204.1.9.53: 60253+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:31.262476 IP 10.204.4.187.1370 10.204.1.10.53: 60253+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:31.263880 IP 10.204.1.10.53 10.204.4.187.1370: 60253* 2/0/0 PTR[|domain] 21:24:31.266332 IP 10.204.4.187.1370 10.204.1.9.53: 40227+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:36.262759 IP 10.204.4.187.1371 10.204.1.10.53: 40227+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:36.264184 IP 10.204.1.10.53 10.204.4.187.1371: 40227* 2/0/0 PTR[|domain] 21:24:36.266653 IP 10.204.4.187.1371 10.204.1.9.53: 28197+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:41.263469 IP 10.204.4.187.1372 10.204.1.10.53: 28197+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:41.264876 IP 10.204.1.10.53 10.204.4.187.1372: 28197* 2/0/0 PTR[|domain] 21:24:41.267343 IP 10.204.4.187.1372 10.204.1.9.53: 30758+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42) 21:24:46.263550 IP 10.204.4.187.1373 10.204.1.10.53: 30758+ PTR? 46.1.204.10.in-addr.arpa. (42)
Bug#441958: locales: 'EOF on stdin at conffile prompt' on noninteractive update
reassign 441958 dpkg thanks Michael Eyrich a écrit : On Wednesday 12 September 2007, you wrote: Michael Eyrich a écrit : Package: locales Version: 2.6.1-3 Severity: normal the following code snippet # one of dialog|noninteractive|readline| export DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive # one of low|medium|high|critical export DEBIAN_PRIORITY=high [...] apt-get -fuy upgrade || errcnt=$? lead to the following error message: Setting up locales (2.6.1-3) ... Configuration file `/etc/locale.alias' == File on system created by you or by a script. == File also in package provided by package maintainer. What would you like to do about it ? Your options are: Y or I : install the package maintainer's version N or O : keep your currently-installed version D : show the differences between the versions Z : background this process to examine the situation The default action is to keep your current version. *** locale.alias (Y/I/N/O/D/Z) [default=N] ? dpkg: error processing locales (--configure): EOF on stdin at conffile prompt Setting up aspell-de (20070829-3) ... Strange error, probably not in locales. Are you upgrading from a script? yes. it's called from cron.daily. I guess, it shouldn't even start asking questions, should it? Well I don't really know, but what is sure is that the problem is not in locales as the question is not asked from locales scripts but from dpkg. I am therefore reassigning the bug to dpkg where people could probably answer you better than me. -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `-people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Bug#441958: locales: 'EOF on stdin at conffile prompt' on noninteractive update
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reassign 441958 dpkg Bug#441958: locales: 'EOF on stdin at conffile prompt' on noninteractive update Bug reassigned from package `locales' to `dpkg'. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: tagging 441824
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.26 tags 441824 + pending Bug#441824: libc6-dbg: /usr/lib/debug/ld-2.3.6.so should be executable There were no tags set. Tags added: pending End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#439859: Change to inline breaks existing code
Consider the following case (simplified from a configure test of experimental's goffice package): conftest.c: #include sys/types.h #include sys/stat.h Compile with gcc -c -ansi -D_BSD_SOURCE conftest.c Result with libc6-dev 2.6.1-3: In file included from /usr/include/sys/types.h:223, from conftest.c:1: /usr/include/sys/sysmacros.h:65: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or '__attribute__' before 'unsigned' /usr/include/sys/sysmacros.h:71: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or '__attribute__' before 'unsigned' /usr/include/sys/sysmacros.h:77: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or '__attribute__' before 'unsigned' This can (and IMHO should) be fixed by declaring the functions __inline__ rather than plain inline. (See gcc's documentation of the -ansi switch for details). Greetings, Ray -- Would you rather be root or reboot? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
r2558 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . rules.d
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-09-12 21:34:33 + (Wed, 12 Sep 2007)
New Revision: 2558
Modified:
glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog
glibc-package/trunk/debian/rules.d/debhelper.mk
Log:
* debian/rules.d/debhelper.mk: fix regex. Closes: #441824.
Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog
===
--- glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog2007-09-12 15:47:45 UTC (rev
2557)
+++ glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog2007-09-12 21:34:33 UTC (rev
2558)
@@ -4,10 +4,11 @@
Closes: bug#441857.
* any/local-sysmacros.diff: use __inline instead of inline for
compatibility with ANSI. Closes: #441959.
- * patches/localedata/tailor-iso14651_t1.diff: correctly fix fi_FI
+ * patches/localedata/tailor-iso14651_t1.diff: correctly fix fi_FI
locale. Closes: bug#441026.
+ * debian/rules.d/debhelper.mk: fix regex. Closes: #441824.
- -- Aurelien Jarno [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed, 12 Sep 2007 17:47:21 +0200
+ -- Aurelien Jarno [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed, 12 Sep 2007 23:33:33 +0200
glibc (2.6.1-3) unstable; urgency=low
Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/rules.d/debhelper.mk
===
--- glibc-package/trunk/debian/rules.d/debhelper.mk 2007-09-12 15:47:45 UTC
(rev 2557)
+++ glibc-package/trunk/debian/rules.d/debhelper.mk 2007-09-12 21:34:33 UTC
(rev 2558)
@@ -106,9 +106,9 @@
# an unescaped regular expression. ld.so must be executable;
# libc.so and NPTL's libpthread.so print useful version
# information when executed.
- find debian/$(curpass) -type f \( -regex '.*lib[0-9]*/ld.*so' \
- -o -regex '.*lib[0-9]*/libpthread-.*so' \
- -o -regex '.*lib[0-9]*/libc-.*so' \) \
+ find debian/$(curpass) -type f \( -regex 'ld.*so' \
+ -o -regex 'libpthread-.*so' \
+ -o -regex 'libc-.*so' \) \
-exec chmod a+x '{}' ';'
dh_makeshlibs -X/usr/lib/debug -p$(curpass) -V $(call xx,shlib_dep)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: glibc's getaddrinfo() sort order
Anthony Towns writes (Re: glibc's getaddrinfo() sort order): On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 01:06:06AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: It's atleast in the spirit of the rfc to prefer one that's on the local network. It might be the intention of rule 9, but then rule 9 isn't very well written. Rule 9 seems perfectly well written, it just does something you (reasonably) consider undesirable. Should I take that as agreement with Steve's and my view, that we should by default not apply rule 9 to IPv4 ? Your opinion seems unclear to me. We haven't heard from the rest of the committee. Does anyone have an answer to my point that application of rule 9 changes the long-established meaning of existing DNS data ? (In ways, I would add, which have proven to cause significant operational problems in practice.) As I say, I think that point is unanswerable and leads inevitably to the conclusion that we should disable this behaviour by default. The rest of your (AJ's) mail seems to be getting bogged down a bit. I'll try to answer what I see as the key aspects. In addition, I think there's two different aspects here: the first is should getaddrinfo() return results in random order to aid in load distribution? and the second is is prefix matching a reasonable way to determine a good host to use? I disagree with your answer to that first question. gethostbyname returns results in random order. getaddrinfo should do the same. (random isn't quite true but it's true enough in the usual case.) AFAICS, the answer to the first question is simply no, it shouldn't -- randomised load balancing like that needs to be done at the application level, You are mistaken. Randomised load balancing like that is _already done_ using multiple IPv4 addresses in the DNS. It has been done this way for nearly two decades. [stuff] Doing it by changing Rule 9 to: I don't think this kind of complexity is warranted here. Even if it were, you seem to be proposing a strategy which depends on guessing whether communication with a particular destination address would involve NAT, which would be fragile. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: glibc's getaddrinfo() sort order
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 12:06:40AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: Does anyone have an answer to my point that application of rule 9 changes the long-established meaning of existing DNS data ? I'm not familiar with how getaddrinfo() has been implemented in the past -- but I think it makes more sense to look at the definition of the function than the data it's manipulating. The RFC tries to make getaddrinfo return a predictable ordering in the face of random orderings from DNS. That seems a perfectly reasonable way to define a function in the abstract; though certainly the ordering it comes up with can be criticised. I disagree with your answer to that first question. gethostbyname returns results in random order. getaddrinfo should do the same. I'd say it's more important that getaddrinfo() on Debian behave the same as on other operating systems, than that it behave in the same way as other functions. I can only take the RFC's assertion as to getaddrinfo()'s proper behaviour though; I don't have a more direct idea how getaddrinfo() behaves in previous versions of Debian, other Linux distros, other libcs, Windows, etc. AFAICS, the answer to the first question is simply no, it shouldn't -- randomised load balancing like that needs to be done at the application level, You are mistaken. [...] What getaddrinfo() should and shouldn't do is defined by the standard, not by what would be most useful. :-/ FWIW, if the standard should be changed, it seems to me that it'd carry more weight having the Debian tech ctte put that recommendation in than a random DD. Cheers, aj signature.asc Description: Digital signature
