Bug 2268
Summary: | samba-1.9.18p10-5.i386.rpm segfaults rpm | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Linux | Reporter: | jherzog |
Component: | samba | Assignee: | Trond Eivind Glomsrxd <teg> |
Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | 5.2 | ||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | i386 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 1999-04-26 21:45:49 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: |
Description
jherzog
1999-04-19 14:54:47 UTC
Sorry I didn't include this before: --- [root@threshold RPMS]# rpm -e -vv samba-1.9.18p10-5 D: counting packages to uninstall D: opening database in //var/lib/rpm/ D: found 1 packages to uninstall D: uninstalling record number 3593560 Segmentation fault [root@threshold RPMS]# rpm -e -vv samba-1.9.18p5-1 D: counting packages to uninstall D: opening database in //var/lib/rpm/ D: found 1 packages to uninstall D: uninstalling record number 4693592 Segmentation fault do rpm -e --notriggers samba Okay: --- [root@threshold RPMS]# rpm -e --notriggers samba-1.9.18p10-5 cannot remove /var/log/samba - directory not empty cannot remove /etc/codepages - directory not empty [root@threshold RPMS]# rpm -qa | grep samba samba-1.9.18p5-1 --- Ah, so it was a script that was segfaulting. Interesting. Well, I was able to uninstall samba-1.9.18p5-1.i386.rpm using "rpm -e --notriggers" in combination with "rpm -q --scripts" and running the scripts by hand. I could then install samba-1.9.18p10-5.i386.rpm the same way. I don't know where the segfault came from, but it was probably actually some command in the scripts that had the error. Why doesn't rpm handle things like this gracefully? It would seem a trivial thing for rpm to tell me which part of the script had a problem... but this is a issue with rpm, not redhat per se. Anyway, thanks for the help. It didn't handle it because of a bug in RPM, which I believe was fixed in a later version. |