|Summary:||rpm-4.0.2-6x: rpmq: header.c:511: headerLoad: Assertion `rdlen == dl' failed|
|Product:||[Retired] Red Hat Linux||Reporter:||Aleksey Nogin <aleksey>|
|Component:||rpm||Assignee:||Jeff Johnson <jbj>|
|Status:||CLOSED RAWHIDE||QA Contact:||David Lawrence <dkl>|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2001-04-22 16:19:41 UTC||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
Description Aleksey Nogin 2001-03-27 16:49:51 UTC
I've upgraded rpm to rpm-4.0.2-6x and I've recompiled rpm2html under it. When I try to run rpm2html, it dies (every time) with rpm2html: header.c:511: headerLoad: Assertion `rdlen == dl' failed. Abort (core dumped) Using strace, I figured out which package "kills" it. If I run rpm -qp tcl-8.0.3-20an.i386.rpm then I get the same thing: rpmq: header.c:511: headerLoad: Assertion `rdlen == dl' failed. Abort (core dumped) gdb shows: (gdb) bt #0 0x40173d21 in __kill () from /lib/libc.so.6 #1 0x40173996 in raise (sig=6) at ../sysdeps/posix/raise.c:27 #2 0x401750b8 in abort () at ../sysdeps/generic/abort.c:88 #3 0x4016dbae in __assert_fail () at assert.c:59 #4 0x4005341d in headerLoad () from /usr/lib/librpm.so.0 #5 0x40053fe9 in headerRead () from /usr/lib/librpm.so.0 #6 0x4005e8c0 in readPackageHeaders () from /usr/lib/librpm.so.0 #7 0x4005eba8 in rpmReadPackageHeader () from /usr/lib/librpm.so.0 #8 0x400620a8 in rpmQueryVerify () from /usr/lib/librpm.so.0 #9 0x40062b47 in rpmQuery () from /usr/lib/librpm.so.0 #10 0x804b697 in poptResetContext () #11 0x4016d9cb in __libc_start_main (main=0x804ac14 <poptResetContext+6364>, argc=5, argv=0xbffffb64, init=0x8048fd8 <_init>, fini=0x804b8fc <_fini>, rtld_fini=0x4000aea0 <_dl_fini>, stack_end=0xbffffb5c) at ../sysdeps/generic/libc-start.c:92 The package in question can be obtained from the URL (above). It was compiled on a RH 5.2 system. I am running RH6.2+all updates.
Comment 1 Jeff Johnson 2001-03-27 16:57:23 UTC
Have you run --rebuilddb to convert from db1 to db3? Was the conversion successful? Otherwise, try erasing and/or reinstalling the tcl package.
Comment 2 Aleksey Nogin 2001-03-27 17:00:20 UTC
Yes, I did --rebuilddb the first thing after I've upgraded rpm. The package in question is an (old) .i386.rpm file, not something I have installed.
Comment 3 Aleksey Nogin 2001-03-27 17:02:03 UTC
BTW, I just tried running rpm -Kv on that package and it worked fine - both MD5 and PGP signatures checked OK.
Comment 4 Jeff Johnson 2001-03-27 17:28:20 UTC
rpm -Kv tests the package, not the header in the database. What happens if you reinstall the package after you've converted to db3? What I suspect is the well known "free list corrupt bug" showing up as a truncated header in the database ...
Comment 5 Aleksey Nogin 2001-03-27 17:34:19 UTC
As I said, the package is not (and never was) installed. Both rpm2html and rpmq die when trying to query the .i386.rpm package, not the database. Just to be sure, I did another --rebuilddb and (no surprize) it didn't change anything.
Comment 6 Jeff Johnson 2001-03-28 16:16:16 UTC
Created attachment 13964 [details] Patch to fix rpm-2.5.x i18n tag offset/length bug
Comment 7 Jeff Johnson 2001-03-28 16:17:00 UTC
Fixed in rpm CVS, will be in rpm-4.0.3
Comment 8 Aleksey Nogin 2001-04-12 17:13:41 UTC
Any estimates on when this will be available? Any plans for a new errata with these fixes? Obviously, I can recompile RPM myself, but it would be so much easier to download an install a package signed by RedHat :-)
Comment 9 Aleksey Nogin 2001-04-22 15:58:14 UTC
This bug still exists in the rpm shipped with RedHat 7.1 and I don't see the fixed package anywhere.
Comment 10 Jeff Johnson 2001-04-22 16:10:45 UTC
And I repeat: Fixed in rpm CVS, will be in rpm-4.0.3 That does NOT say Red Hat 7.1 or rpm-4.0.2, and a failure of a 2.5 year old package built with a broken version of rpm is not a sufficient show stopper to change rpm in Red Hat 7.1
Comment 11 Aleksey Nogin 2001-04-22 16:19:36 UTC
Well, then it should be marked "RESOLVED CVS". :-) But marking it "RESOLVED RAWHIDE" is inaccurate since Rawhide does not have an updated package.
Comment 12 Aleksey Nogin 2001-04-22 18:50:18 UTC
After I upgraded to 4.0.3, everyting seems fine. Thanks!