Re: fsck segfaults on rpi3 running 13-stable
- Reply: bob prohaska : "Re: fsck segfaults on rpi3 running 13-stable"
- In reply to: bob prohaska : "Re: fsck segfaults on rpi3 running 13-stable"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2023 19:31:59 UTC
On Feb 12, 2023, at 11:13, bob prohaska <fbsd@www.zefox.net> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 09:21:20AM -0800, Mark Millard wrote: >> >> But the debugger inforation/symbols from your system are >> needed to get symbolic results from that file. My instance >> of main is not going to be a match. >> >> You need to be the one getting the backtrace from your >> system. >> > > The -current system isn't updated yet, just running buildworld. > There's no problem regenerating the core dump. > > I've gotten as far as > > root@www:~ # lldb --core ./fsck_ffs.core > (lldb) target create --core "./fsck_ffs.core" > Core file '/root/fsck_ffs.core' (aarch64) was loaded. > (lldb) > > Typing "gui" brings up a curses window, but I've no > idea what to do next. > > Some guidance will be needed to make further progress. > Is there a beginners's tutorial somewhere? help in lldb reports: . . . bt -- Show the current thread's call stack. Any numeric argument displays at most that many frames. The argument 'all' displays all threads. Use 'settings set frame-format' to customize the printing of individual frames and 'settings set thread-format' to customize the thread header. . . . So typing: bt all should attempt to produce a backtrace (of each thread). (There is both exit and quit to leave lldb.) I'll note that another option is to run fsck_ffs from lldb in the first place. The below is running: "fsck_ffs -n" (which is not really a valid command) # which fsck_ffs /sbin/fsck_ffs # lldb /sbin/fsck_ffs (lldb) target create "/sbin/fsck_ffs" Current executable set to '/sbin/fsck_ffs' (aarch64). (lldb) run -n Process 8977 launched: '/sbin/fsck_ffs' (aarch64) usage: fsck_ffs [-BCdEFfnpRrSyZ] [-b block] [-c level] [-m mode] filesystem ... Process 8977 exited with status = 1 (0x00000001) (lldb) So you would use something else than "-n". Mine, of course, does not stop for the problem, but once yours does, you could use the "bt all" command. === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com