On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 06:32:22PM +0800, Crispin Wellington wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 16:40, Chris McCormick wrote:
> > I'm suspecting i might have some kind of broken glibc action going on. I
> > think that it might not be able to re-attach to tar because of an actual
> > corruption in the library binaries that handle that kind of thing. Maybe
> > it's half installed and some of the hooks to do with process attaching
> > aren't there or some weirdness like that. Hopefully it isn't something
> > sinister.
>
> Absolutely. The tar process goes open("/lib/libc.so.6", O_RDONLY) = 5.
> So perhaps the tar package is one that is built to use a newer (or
> older?) version of libc. You're trying to install that version, but
> because its not already installed the tar breaks (then why does it work
> on its own but not when inside of dpkg???)
That honestly sounds really unlikely. I think it was actually a race
condition in the code in dpkg that calls tar, so it randomly broke
depending on timing. If I get a chance tonight I'll try to dig up the
old mailing list threads about it - I couldn't find anything in a quick
search of the bug tracking system, but it may not have been there.
--
Colin Watson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
