Re: r350484 and ASLR enabled - init died (signal 6, exit 0)

2019-08-08 Thread Konstantin Belousov
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 02:53:04PM +0200, Trond Endrestøl wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > Has anyone else noticed the kernel being unable to spawn init lately? > > > > > > > > > > All I get is: > > > &g

Re: r350484 and ASLR enabled - init died (signal 6, exit 0)

2019-08-07 Thread Vladimir Zakharov
Hi, > > > > > > > > Has anyone else noticed the kernel being unable to spawn init lately? > > > > > > > > All I get is: > > > > > > > > init died (signal 6, exit 0) > > > > panic: Going nowhere without my init! >

Re: r350484 and ASLR enabled - init died (signal 6, exit 0)

2019-08-06 Thread Trond Endrestøl
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 22:32+0200, Trond Endrestøl wrote: > On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 22:23+0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 08:10:43PM +0200, Trond Endrestøl wrote: > > > > > I'm going home and see if VBox 6.0.10 exhibits the same behaviour. > > > > Try r350608. There was a

Re: r350484 and ASLR enabled - init died (signal 6, exit 0)

2019-08-05 Thread Trond Endrestøl
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 22:23+0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 08:10:43PM +0200, Trond Endrestøl wrote: > > > I'm going home and see if VBox 6.0.10 exhibits the same behaviour. > > Try r350608. There was a mis-merge in the committed patch (more serious > part), and some limi

Re: r350484 and ASLR enabled - init died (signal 6, exit 0)

2019-08-05 Thread Konstantin Belousov
ernel being unable to spawn init lately? > > > > > > All I get is: > > > > > > init died (signal 6, exit 0) > > > panic: Going nowhere without my init! > > > > > > /sbin/init hasn't had any changes in 4 months, and is present in

Re: r350484 and ASLR enabled - init died (signal 6, exit 0)

2019-08-05 Thread Trond Endrestøl
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 06:02-0700, David Wolfskill wrote: > On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 02:53:04PM +0200, Trond Endrestøl wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Has anyone else noticed the kernel being unable to spawn init lately? > > > > All I get is: > > > > init die

Re: r350583 - init died (signal 6, exit 0)

2019-08-05 Thread David Wolfskill
On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 02:53:04PM +0200, Trond Endrestøl wrote: > Hi, > > Has anyone else noticed the kernel being unable to spawn init lately? > > All I get is: > > init died (signal 6, exit 0) > panic: Going nowhere without my init! > > /sbin/init hasn't

r350583 - init died (signal 6, exit 0)

2019-08-05 Thread Trond Endrestøl
Hi, Has anyone else noticed the kernel being unable to spawn init lately? All I get is: init died (signal 6, exit 0) panic: Going nowhere without my init! /sbin/init hasn't had any changes in 4 months, and is present in /sbin in the new BE. I've tried and failed in VBox at home th

npviewer.bin exited on signal 6 (core dumped) with www/linux-flashplayer

2018-08-14 Thread Graham Perrin
I don't know whether it's specific to www/linux-flashplayer, but whenever the plug-in loads (in Waterfox or Firefox) there's a dump. This morning, for example (from dmesg, after a few visits to <https://helpx.adobe.com/flash-player.html>): pid 34576 (npviewer.bin), uid 100

Re: -current of today, kconsole and others crash with signal 6

2003-08-31 Thread Andreas Klemm
On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 02:58:12PM +0200, Andreas Klemm wrote: > JFYI: This hasn't been the case 1 month ago with kernel/os from July 30. A recompilation of everything (portupgrade -avf) helped, sorry for the false alarm. Andreas /// -- Andreas Klemm - Powered by FreeBSD 5.1-CURRENT Nee

-current of today, kconsole and others crash with signal 6

2003-08-30 Thread Andreas Klemm
JFYI: This hasn't been the case 1 month ago with kernel/os from July 30. machine i386 cpu I686_CPU ident TITAN options SCHED_4BSD #4BSD scheduler options INET#InterNETworking options FFS #Be

Re: signal 6 to XFree86 (Re: cvs commit: src/tools/tools...)

2002-10-05 Thread Alexander Leidinger
r (blank screen + DPMS), and it even crashes when I do nothing... I've played some mp3s in a xterm and worked in the room *boom* signal 6. At the moment I'm running with http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs, no signal 6 so far but the system is up only for 50 minutes... as al

Re: signal 6 to XFree86 (Re: cvs commit: src/tools/tools...)

2002-10-04 Thread Mikhail Teterin
[Moved to -current] > On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 06:30:09PM -0700, Lars Eggert wrote: > > Wesley Morgan wrote: > > >I had one today, they have decreased significantly since removing the > > >Type1 module from my server configuration. > > > > I've also found that disabling xscreensav

Re: signal 6 to XFree86 (Re: cvs commit: src/tools/tools...)

2002-10-04 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 06:30:09PM -0700, Lars Eggert wrote: > Wesley Morgan wrote: > >I had one today, they have decreased significantly since removing the > >Type1 module from my server configuration. > > I've also found that disabling xscreensaver/xlockmore helps - or just > set it to "blank

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death(signal 6))

2002-10-04 Thread Daniel Eischen
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 16:37:21 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > > > Can you try the patch at: > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs > > > > It works! Already 5 hours without a single

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death(signal 6))

2002-10-04 Thread Daniel Eischen
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > > Can you try the patch at: > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs > > > > I haven't had a chance to compile or test it, but it should > > be easy enough to fix if it doesn't (compile). > > I

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-04 Thread Giorgos Keramidas
John Hay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: : John Polstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: : > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, : > Andrey A. Chernov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: : > > Additional details: it cause not only cvsupd death, but rarely cvsup : > &g

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-04 Thread John Hay
> > > > > > Can you try the patch at: > > > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs > > > > > > > It works! Already 5 hours without a single signal 6. > > Thanks! > > Let me test it myself and I'll commi

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death(signal 6))

2002-10-04 Thread Bruce Evans
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Daniel Eischen wrote: > Can you try the patch at: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs > > I haven't had a chance to compile or test it, but it should > be easy enough to fix if it doesn't (compile). It seems a bit fragile. As I understand it, it loads a clean

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death(signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread Julian Elischer
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, John Polstra wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Can you try the patch at: > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs > > > > I haven't had a chance to compile or test it, but it should > > be easy enough t

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death(signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread Daniel Eischen
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 16:37:21 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > > > Can you try the patch at: > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs > > > > It works! Already 5 hours without a single si

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death(signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread John Polstra
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can you try the patch at: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs > > I haven't had a chance to compile or test it, but it should > be easy enough to fix if it doesn't (compile). > > I'm still not exactly s

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 07:52:50 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 16:37:21 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > > > Can you try the patch at: > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs > > > > It works! Already 5 hours

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 16:37:21 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > Can you try the patch at: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs > It works! Already 5 hours without a single signal 6. -- Andrey A. Chernov http://ache.pp.ru/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death(signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread Daniel Eischen
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 16:37:21 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > Can you try the patch at: > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs > > > > I'll try it a bit later, but now have a question about it: why you > redefine _MC_FP* cons

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 16:37:21 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > Can you try the patch at: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs > I'll try it a bit later, but now have a question about it: why you redefine _MC_FP* constants? They are for different fields in anycase. -- Andrey A

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death(signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread Daniel Eischen
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, David O'Brien wrote: > On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 06:48:58AM +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > > The bug completely gone after I revert machdep.c to 1.538. This commit > > cause bug: > > > > > > revision 1.539

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread David O'Brien
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 06:48:58AM +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > The bug completely gone after I revert machdep.c to 1.538. This commit > cause bug: > > > revision 1.539 > date: 2002/09/30 07:02:22; author: obrien; state:

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread Alexander Kabaev
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002 23:00:53 +0400 "Andrey A. Chernov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I test it with exact the same cvsupd data set and system files, but > with different kernels. Kernel without the commit in question not > show any signs of signal 6 in 12 hours. Ker

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
copying over ucontext, it seems he have an idea, why it happens. The signal 6 problems are mostly with cvsup_d_ (always happens in first 20 minutes of running real life cvsup mirror). They are very rare with cvsup itself (I only see one during the test). See message from John Hay in this thre

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
hout the commit in question not show any signs of signal 6 in 12 hours. Kernel with this commit show signal 6 death in approximate first 20 minutes. -- Andrey A. Chernov http://ache.pp.ru/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread John Hay
ound > > and have their machines setup. > > > > Submitted by: eischen > > > > Good sleuthing! > > > Additional details: it cause not only cvsupd death, but rarely cvsup > > signal 6 death too with this

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread John Polstra
chines setup. > > Submitted by: eischen > Good sleuthing! > Additional details: it cause not only cvsupd death, but rarely cvsup > signal 6 death too with this diagnostic: > > *** > *** runtime error: > ***Value out of range > ***file

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread David O'Brien
. > > Submitted by: eischen > > > Please back it out or do it properly! > > Additional details: it cause not only cvsupd death, but rarely cvsup > signal 6 death too with this diagnostic: I haven't seen any problems with cvsup since the return to the ol

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death(signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread Bruce Evans
On Wed, 2 Oct 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: > On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > > > The bug completely gone after I revert machdep.c to 1.538. This commit > > cause bug: > > ... > > revision 1.539 > > ... > > Please back it out or do it properly! > > this IS the backout.. it's now how

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-03 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 08:11:10 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 20:51:40 -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > > > Please back it out or do it properly! > > > > this IS the backout.. it's now how it was before, including in 4.x > > I mean - back out this backout - it

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-02 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 20:51:40 -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > Please back it out or do it properly! > > this IS the backout.. it's now how it was before, including in 4.x I mean - back out this backout - it damage 5.0 FP binaries. I don't care about 4.x -- Andrey A. Chernov http://ac

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-02 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 20:50:52 -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: > > Please back it out or do it properly! > > did you recompile the apps and the libraries? 1st try: I got signal 6 with old, but 5.0 binaries dynamically linked with m3 libraries. 2nd try: I recompile whole cvsup,

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death(signal 6))

2002-10-02 Thread Julian Elischer
. > > Submitted by: eischen > > > Please back it out or do it properly! this IS the backout.. it's now how it was before, including in 4.x > > Additional details: it cause not only cvsupd death, but rarely cvsup > signal 6 death too with this diagnostic: > > *

Re: Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death(signal 6))

2002-10-02 Thread Julian Elischer
. > > Submitted by: eischen > > > Please back it out or do it properly! did you recompile the apps and the libraries? > > Additional details: it cause not only cvsupd death, but rarely cvsup > signal 6 death too with this diagnostic: > > *** > *** runtime error:

Reason: releng4 comp. hack, machdep.c 1.539 (was: cvsupd death (signal 6))

2002-10-02 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
cvsupd death, but rarely cvsup signal 6 death too with this diagnostic: *** *** runtime error: ***Value out of range ***file "/tmp/a/ports/lang/ezm3/work/ezm3-1.0/libs/libm3/src/uid/Common/Time Stamp.m3", line 63 *** On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 19:25:43 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrot

Re: cvsupd death (signal 6)

2002-10-01 Thread Matthew Dillon
: :Hmm, no. Backing out tcp_input.c change not fix this bug... I'll try to :rollback on per-day basis... : :On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 05:06:51 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: :> The death remains after ksiginfo backing out, so I start to suspect recent :> TCPIP changes (tcp_input.c). : :-- :Andr

Re: cvsupd death (signal 6)

2002-10-01 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
Hmm, no. Backing out tcp_input.c change not fix this bug... I'll try to rollback on per-day basis... On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 05:06:51 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > The death remains after ksiginfo backing out, so I start to suspect recent > TCPIP changes (tcp_input.c). -- Andrey A. Cherno

Re: cvsupd death (signal 6)

2002-10-01 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
ys ago. Does anybody else saw > this too? > > cvsup & cvsupd on the same machine talking to each other: > > messages says: > kernel: pid 15533 (cvsupd), uid 2068: exited on signal 6 (core dumped) > > cvsup.log says: > TreeList failed: Network write failure: Connecti

signal 6 exits on a lodaed system?

2001-08-09 Thread Matthew Jacob
I was trying to do a make -j 16.. silly me: lock order reversal 1st 0xfe000a90c508 process lock @ ../../../vm/vm_glue.c:469 2nd 0xfe0ddcc0 lockmgr interlock @ ../../../kern/kern_lock.c:239 pid 35005 (cc), uid 0: exited on signal 6 (core dumped) pid 35003 (sh), uid 0: exited on

rlogin exited on signal 6

2000-01-14 Thread John W. DeBoskey
Hi, I just installed 4.0-2112-SNAP. Everything appears to be working fine so far (no softupdates), with the exception of one bug which I started to look at and posted about 2 months ago or so... Basically, rlogin randomly exits on signal 6. From messages: Jan 14 13:28:07 magenta

Signal 6

1999-09-26 Thread Stephan van Beerschoten
(nil)) (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:SI 0 %eax) (nil))) gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1obj got fatal signal 6 *** Error code 1 This is reproducable simply by changing to the directory and executing the gcc line. I'd like to know if this is -current related (gcc), or -por