Bug 173885

Summary: /usr/lib/rpm/rpmq: free(): invalid pointer: 0x096932b0
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Ricky Ng-Adam <rngadam>
Component: rpmAssignee: Paul Nasrat <nobody+pnasrat>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Mike McLean <mikem>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 4CC: k.georgiou, mal
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-03-29 22:14:59 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
error output
none
what I got as an output
none
Command and backtrace from rpm -V none

Description Ricky Ng-Adam 2005-11-22 04:10:53 UTC 
Description of problem:

*** glibc detected *** /usr/lib/rpm/rpmq: free(): invalid pointer: 0x096932b0 ***

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

rpm-4.4.1-22

How reproducible:

always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. execute `rpm -qaV > verified-list`
2. 
3.
  
Actual results:

crash

Expected results:

no crash

Additional info:

will attach complete backtrace and output file
Comment 1 Ricky Ng-Adam 2005-11-22 04:10:53 UTC 
Created attachment 121329 [details]
error output
Comment 2 Ricky Ng-Adam 2005-11-22 04:11:49 UTC 
Created attachment 121330 [details]
what I got as an output
Comment 3 Andy Green 2005-11-22 19:27:24 UTC 
Created attachment 121366 [details]
Command and backtrace from rpm -V

Using rpm -V on filesystem package (only, it appears) causes the chunks to blow

Backtrace attached.
Comment 4 Paul Nasrat 2005-11-22 21:01:58 UTC 
When FC5Test1 comes out can you upgrade rpm only on your system and see if it is
resolved.
Comment 5 Paul Nasrat 2005-12-02 22:10:35 UTC 
*** Bug 174861 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 6 Paul Nasrat 2006-03-29 22:14:59 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 162037 ***