FS#66522 - SEGFAULT in libalpm.so.12
Attached to Project:
Pacman
Opened by Jonas Große Sundrup (cherti) - Sunday, 03 May 2020, 12:31 GMT
Last edited by Andrew Gregory (andrewgregory) - Tuesday, 19 May 2020, 19:57 GMT
Opened by Jonas Große Sundrup (cherti) - Sunday, 03 May 2020, 12:31 GMT
Last edited by Andrew Gregory (andrewgregory) - Tuesday, 19 May 2020, 19:57 GMT
|
Details
# Summary and Info:
pacman-version: 5.2.1-4 pyalpm-version: 0.9.1-2 I am regularly, but not really reproducably unfortunately, running into a segfault within libalpm.so.12 when used via pyalpm. I have been running into this issue while writing blinky [0] and at least once this happened when this function [1] was called with 'python-mastodon' as an argument, see the trimmed down example below in the Steps to Reproduce. [0] https://github.com/cherti/blinky [1] https://github.com/cherti/blinky/blob/master/blinky/pacman.py#L25 Steps to Reproduce: This is a little difficult, in *theory*, the following code should trigger the issue (trimmed down blinky-logic to where it triggered in blinky), but doesn't: #!/usr/bin/env python3 import pyalpm, pycman handle = pycman.config.init_with_config('/etc/pacman.conf') ldb = handle.get_localdb() #sdbs.handle.get_syncdb() s = pyalpm.find_satisfier(ldb.pkgcache, 'python-mastodon') I haven't even been able to reliably reproduce the issue with blinky, in subsequent repetitions of the same command the segfault sometimes triggers and sometimes does not. Attached is everything I extracted from coredumpctl so far, in the hope that it might be useful. If there is anything you need or I could try to investigate the issue further, feel free to get back to me. Any directions of how to pin down the issue further are also greatly appreciated! |
This task depends upon
Closed by Andrew Gregory (andrewgregory)
Tuesday, 19 May 2020, 19:57 GMT
Reason for closing: Not a bug
Additional comments about closing: Reopen this if you can replicate in a single-threaded environment.
Tuesday, 19 May 2020, 19:57 GMT
Reason for closing: Not a bug
Additional comments about closing: Reopen this if you can replicate in a single-threaded environment.
The backtrace is again attached, furthermore, I uploaded the complete coredump here:
https://share.cherti.org/398dfecbc3c180d08f5e/blinky.coredump
As I wasn't so far able to reproduce the issue in a slimmed down code, it's unfortunately the entirity of blinky still around it.
It again crashed in the same line in the blinky code as denoted in the report above, with a different package however, whereas the one noted in the Report above did not cause any problems.
If there is anything else I can do to help getting to the core of this, feel free to reach out!
I haven't observed the issue so far with the sync-DBs so far, only with the local one. Pure luck or is find_satisfier called on the sync-DBs in pyalpm (potentially accidentially) thread-safe because the sync-DBs are structured differently on disk?
Thanks a lot for taking a look into it!