March 2015 - openSUSE Bugs - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[Bug 918466] mkfontscale segfault on factory update
by bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com 03 Mar '15

03 Mar '15

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=918466 --- Comment #28 from Petr Gajdos <pgajdos(a)suse.com> --- (Or, run mkfontscale manually, of course ;).) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 918466] mkfontscale segfault on factory update
by bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com 03 Mar '15

03 Mar '15

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=918466 Petr Gajdos <pgajdos(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(mpluskal(a)suse.com | |) --- Comment #27 from Petr Gajdos <pgajdos(a)suse.com> --- Matin, could you please test mkfontscale package from: http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/pgajdos/openSUSE_Factory/ I tested like this: BEFORE # touch /usr/share/fonts/ghostscript/ # fonts-config sh: line 1: 471 Segmentation fault /usr/bin/mkfontscale /usr/share/fonts/ghostscript > /dev/null 2>&1 # cat /usr/share/ghostscript/fonts/fonts.scale 0 AFTER # touch /usr/share/fonts/ghostscript/ # fonts-config # grep -c hrgrr.pfa /usr/share/ghostscript/fonts/fonts.scale 12 # Alternatively, you can test via installing/deinstalling some fonts, but do not forgot to touch /usr/share/fonts/ghostscript/ before every operation. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 920227] rpm fails with "error reading from file" when installing (relocating) RPMs that contain only a single file
by bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com 03 Mar '15

03 Mar '15

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=920227 --- Comment #3 from Michael Schröder <mls(a)suse.com> --- (Fixed upstream with commit 65c7cc17664358051f0358de272e616dd88ab624) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 871704] every second boot fails during mount of a /etc/fstab entry
by bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com 03 Mar '15

03 Mar '15

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871704 --- Comment #96 from Liuhua Wang <lwang(a)suse.com> --- It is weird. You are not using lvmetad, so it is unlikely to have problem. All the mounts on lvm partition failed or only some failed? Do you have anything special with the physical disks(multipath, iscsi, etc.)? Does it go into maintainance mode when it starts failed? Would you please provide these information? -pvs -vgs -lvs -jounalctl -a -/var/log/boot (it is better with level of DEBUG) Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 920368] openQA: yast fails to install on ext4 system
by bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com 03 Mar '15

03 Mar '15

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=920368 Arvin Schnell <aschnell(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |aschnell(a)suse.com Component|YaST2 |Basesystem Assignee|yast2-maintainers(a)suse.de |bnc-team-screening(a)forge.pr | |ovo.novell.com QA Contact|jsrain(a)suse.com |qa-bugs(a)suse.de --- Comment #3 from Arvin Schnell <aschnell(a)suse.com> --- The YaST log shows that YaST creates partition vda2 but it does not show up in /proc/partitions. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 920227] New: rpm fails with "error reading from file" when installing (relocating) RPMs that contain only a single file
by bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com 03 Mar '15

03 Mar '15

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=920227 Bug ID: 920227 Summary: rpm fails with "error reading from file" when installing (relocating) RPMs that contain only a single file Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE 13.1 Version: Final Hardware: x86-64 OS: openSUSE 13.1 Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Basesystem Assignee: bnc-team-screening(a)forge.provo.novell.com Reporter: lulaefae(a)gmx.de QA Contact: qa-bugs(a)suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- Trying to rpm install the genuine upstream LibreOffice 4.4.1 RPMs from http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/stable/4.4.1/rpm/x86/ as a normal user results in rpm throughing an "error: error reading from file". This bug is only triggered when the installation is relocating the rpm, i.e. the "--prefix" option is used with the rpm command. The interesting thing about it is, that there has been a fix for this from 2013 in Fedora's rpm which has not yet made it into SuSE's rpm: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001553#c6 http://rpm.org/gitweb?p=rpm.git;a=commitdiff;h=65c7cc17664358051f0358de272e… I have > cat /etc/os-release NAME=openSUSE VERSION="13.1 (Bottle)" VERSION_ID="13.1" PRETTY_NAME="openSUSE 13.1 (Bottle) (x86_64)" ID=opensuse ANSI_COLOR="0;32" CPE_NAME="cpe:/o:opensuse:opensuse:13.1" BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.opensuse.org" HOME_URL="https://opensuse.org/" ID_LIKE="suse" > rpm -qi rpm Name : rpm Version : 4.11.1 Release : 6.17.1 Architecture: x86_64 Install Date: Mo 31 Jan 2015 14:30:46 CET Group : System/Packages Size : 4663090 License : GPL-2.0+ Signature : RSA/SHA256, Do 22 Jan 2015 08:24:35 CET, Key ID b88b2fd43dbdc284 Source RPM : rpm-4.11.1-6.17.1.src.rpm Build Date : Mi 21 Jan 2015 17:41:50 CET Build Host : build31 Relocations : (not relocatable) Packager : http://bugs.opensuse.org Vendor : openSUSE Summary : The RPM Package Manager Steps to reproduce: Download LibreOffice_4.4.1_Linux_x86-64_rpm.tar.gz with md5 hash 8de6f3d1d4af3826a3a1695a47444948 from the LibreOffice download site. Unpack the tar. And either try to install libobasis4.4-draw-4.4.1.2-2.x86_64.rpm (md5 hash 6b1fbdfd4c23c851bdec86c48450d9f2) directly or try to install the whole bunch rpm -Uhv --nodeps --dbpath ~/rpm-db --prefix /home/lule/LibreOffice-4.4.1 LibreOffice_4.4.1.2_Linux_x86-64_rpm/RPMS/*.rpm error: error reading from file LibreOffice_4.4.1.2_Linux_x86-64_rpm/RPMS/libobasis4.4-draw-4.4.1.2-2.x86_64.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 919819] ld failure with error: corrupted double-linked list
by bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com 03 Mar '15

03 Mar '15

http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919819 Richard Biener <rguenther(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|UPSTREAM |--- --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener <rguenther(a)suse.com> --- (In reply to Giacomo Comes from comment #5) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > > Confirmed. The issue is combining -pie -fPIE and -static. On x86_64 you > > instead get > > > > > gcc -o ct -fPIE -pie -static t.c > > /usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-suse-linux/4.8/../../../../x86_64-suse-linux/bin/ld: > > /usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-suse-linux/4.8/crtbeginT.o: relocation R_X86_64_32 > > against `__TMC_END__' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile > > with -fPIC > > /usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-suse-linux/4.8/crtbeginT.o: error adding symbols: Bad > > value > > collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status > > > > that's because there isn't a PIE static crtbegin.o. On i?86 you are just > > lucky. Combining PIE and -static is simply not supported. > > Tha fact that it is not supported is just fine. The problem is that > configure hangs and do not complete on 32-bit. That's because ld does not > terminate with an error but it hangs. You need to kill the ld process in > order to let configure continue. Yes. Note that with binutils 2.25 from Factory the test will succeed (but the produced binary is non-sensical and cannot be executed - is the test an execute or a link one?) > > New linker from Factory seems to handle this fine (in some sense - it > > produces > > a shared object with no dependencies). > > > > What is the configure test testing? > > checking if gcc -std=gnu99 static flag -static works. > The answer should be no, but on 32-bit it never gets there. so where does it get -fPIE -pie from? I think that https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=818d220a6fe3d051… fixed the hang. Sill you'd get a broken executable as result. SLE12 is affected as well. Might make sense to release a combined update also picking all changes from the 2.14 branch that accumulated. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 898265] Cannot start other OS because the generated grub.cfg content references nonexisting partition
by bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com 03 Mar '15

03 Mar '15

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=898265 Michael Chang <mchang(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #5 from Michael Chang <mchang(a)suse.com> --- Hi Istvan, An invalid/obsoleted menu.lst caused the problem. I know we can try to improve the situation by doing more sanity checks, but that's a nice to have and also any more checks could be still insufficient and time consuming. (os-prober has many reports that it takes too long in probing and make it notorious..). Thanks for report and your feedback. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 854569] Update flaws boot configuration
by bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com 03 Mar '15

03 Mar '15

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=854569 Michael Chang <mchang(a)suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |NORESPONSE --- Comment #9 from Michael Chang <mchang(a)suse.com> --- Please reopen if you still have problem and update above comment. Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 902982] UEFI not working properly with 13.2 RC or 13.1 live media, only runs into Grub Rescue Command Prompt
by bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com 03 Mar '15

03 Mar '15

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902982 --- Comment #7 from Michael Chang <mchang(a)suse.com> --- This is likely a firmware problem, as it's reported path for efi loader image is in /EFI/Boot, while the correct one should be /EFI/BOOT. It could be harmless for looking up files in ESP, as it's formatted vfat and is case-insensitive. But for the installer which looks up most of it's files and contents in iso9660 fs that become a problem as it's case sensitive. Until a sane fix can be found and provide. we use a workaround patch and I will include it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0