the fix is still in lucid, don't reopen closed bugs but open a new
ticket rather for your issue
** Changed in: nvclock (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Fix Released
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/72117
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
In Lucid the problem has returnd, so its new
** Changed in: nvclock (Ubuntu)
Status: Fix Released = New
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/72117
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
Hi there, try modifying backend/bios.c in function verify_bios like
this...
/* All bioses start with this '0x55 0xAA' signature */
if((rom[0] != (char)0x55) || ((rom[1] 0xff) != (char)0xAA))
return 0;
Don't know why rom[1] is 0xff55 when my
Houls I fill in new bug report?
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/72117
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
As miky91 noted, it happens in Jaunty. E. g.
y...@spacecraft:~$ nvclock -T
*** stack smashing detected ***: nvclock terminated
=== Backtrace: =
/lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6(__fortify_fail+0x48)[0xb7eb5da8]
/lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6(__fortify_fail+0x0)[0xb7eb5d60]
nvclock[0x8058e39]
*Should I fill in new bug report?
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/72117
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
I have the same problem with Jaunty (nvclock 0.8b4-1ubuntu2)
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/72117
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
The problem still seems to be an issue for me.
$ uname -a:
Linux falcon-2 2.6.20-16-lowlatency #2 SMP PREEMPT Wed May 23 01:49:41 UTC 2007
i686 GNU/Linux
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/72117
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
** Changed in: nvclock (Ubuntu)
Status: Fix Committed = Fix Released
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://launchpad.net/bugs/72117
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
I confirm that latest nvclock package (0.8b2-1ubuntu1) solved the
problem in my Feisty amd64.
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://launchpad.net/bugs/72117
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
nvclock (0.8b2-1ubuntu1) feisty; urgency=low
* Hack in dpatch.
* Use patch from Andreas Simon to fix buffer overflow. (LP: #72117)
* Update Maintainer address.
-- Steve Kowalik [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:23:34 +1100
** Changed in: nvclock (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed =
Here is a debdiff which fixes the issue here.
In src/backend/back_linux.c I changed the line
if(sscanf(buffer,%s %d %d,name, size, used) != 3) continue;
to
if(sscanf(buffer,%19s %d %d,name, size, used) != 3) continue;
to prevend a overflow of name[].
I attached a debdiff and will also notify
** Tags added: patch
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://launchpad.net/bugs/72117
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
** Changed in: nvclock (Ubuntu)
Assignee: ville palo = (unassigned)
Status: In Progress = Confirmed
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://launchpad.net/bugs/72117
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
If you are asking me:
cpufreq_conservative 8712 0 - Live 0xf8b07000
Is longest having just 20 chars, no more.
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://launchpad.net/bugs/72117
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Thanks! 20 chars + NULL char is enough to crash the stack:
from back_linux.c (buffer contains line from /proc/modules)
char name[20];
int size;
int used;
/* Check to see if NVdriver/nvidia is loaded and if it is used.
/ For various versions the driver isn't initialized whe n X hasn't
/ been
Thanks, I got it working by _dirty_ little trick:
As I know I am always using nvidia driver, so I changed whole function to:
static int check_driver() {return 2; //driver nvidia}
Re-compiled no more stack smashing. I also tried to increase char
name[20] size, but somehow it didn't work.
I am
Please, could you check your /proc/modules file? Is there some modules with
a name longer than 20 charachters?
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://launchpad.net/bugs/72117
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
** Changed in: nvclock (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided = Medium
Assignee: (unassigned) = ville palo
Status: Unconfirmed = Confirmed
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://launchpad.net/bugs/72117
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
This happens every single time with nvclock 0.8b2 on my fresh Edgy
install (and I am pretty sure it also did it with my previous Dapper
install). For reproducing, have a (Asus) GF 7300 (GT), download source
from http://www.linuxhardware.org/nvclock/, ./configure make make
install nvclock -s.
see previous comment
** Attachment added: backtrace of nvclock 0.8b2 crashing
http://librarian.launchpad.net/5629265/gdb-nvclock.txt
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://launchpad.net/bugs/72117
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
With current 2.6.20-4 kernel, it happens reliably.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/justin# uname -a
Linux justin01 2.6.20-4-generic #2 SMP Fri Jan 5 04:31:55 UTC 2007 i686
GNU/Linux
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/justin# nvclock -s
*** stack smashing detected ***: nvclock terminated
Aborted (core dumped)
--
Woops. Seems that a reboot fixes the issue. My suggestion is that
whatever flag be set in order to have the Update Notification applet
indicate that a reboot is necessary.
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://launchpad.net/bugs/72117
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
I was not able to reproduce on my edgy, could you please attach the crash
dump/backtraces, instructions can be found here:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProgramCrash
--
Stack Smashing Prevents Use
https://launchpad.net/bugs/72117
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
24 matches
Mail list logo
