Description of problem: I've bricked a box when testing glibc, by removing glibc. Because I'm a smart guy, I had glibc rpms downloaded, and busybox isntalled for this purpose, just in case. So I've tried to fix things easily: # busybox rpm -i glibc-2.5-24.i686.rpm which kabooms like this: *** glibc detected *** busybox: malloc(): memory corruption: 0x085c5d20 *** ======= Backtrace: ========= [0x8146e18] [0x81483cb] [0x80febb4] ======= Memory map: ======== 00800000-00801000 r-xp 00800000 00:00 0 [vdso] 08048000-0823b000 r-xp 00000000 fd:00 10584066 /sbin/busybox 0823b000-0823e000 rw-p 001f2000 fd:00 10584066 /sbin/busybox 0823e000-0830e000 rw-p 0823e000 00:00 0 085c4000-085e6000 rw-p 085c4000 00:00 0 b7c00000-b7c24000 rw-p b7c00000 00:00 0 b7c24000-b7d00000 ---p b7c24000 00:00 0 b7d25000-b7d4b000 r--p 00000000 00:18 83198326 /mnt/qa/scratch/i386-5c-m1/2009:8182/tps/glibc-2.5-24.i686.rpm b7d4b000-b7f4b000 r--p 00000000 fd:00 463506 /usr/lib/locale/locale-archive bfec1000-bfed7000 rw-p bfec1000 00:00 0 [stack] Aborted Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): # rpm -q busybox busybox-1.2.0-4.el5.i386 How reproducible: always, at least on i386. on x86, I see 'Segmentation fault' wih glibc packages in cca 50% cases Steps to Reproduce: 1. busybox rpm -i glibc-2.5-24.i686.rpm (can be even rhel5.3's 2.5-29 glibc) 2. see the abort Actual results: abort, segfaults & friends Expected results: my box breathing fresh glibc again Additional info: It seems like only glibc packages aborts busybox. I've tried few more, not seeing the problems
Created attachment 320662 [details] Fixes memory corruption, errors on nonexistent usernames, mishandling of hardlinks in cpio and bogus varnings out of mkdir("/dir/already/exists")
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2009-1249.html