What could cause "random" segfaults on different computers, different systems?
Approx. same timeline for appearing..
Here's some cropped, random pick from one install, from /var/log/messages:
user.info kernel: frontend_timeou[15133]: segfault at 0 ip 08091f1f sp bf879160 error 6 in bash[8048000+e9000]
user.info kernel: traps: smbclient[22941] general protection ip:b63b6218 sp:bff2bed0 error:0 in libnettle.so.4.7[b6393000+31000]
user.info kernel: ROX-Filer[10770]: segfault at 8d3c000 ip 0809bcf0 sp bf9d44b0 error 4 in ROX-Filer[8048000+95000]
user.info kernel: icewm[8105]: segfault at c8 ip 08078e81 sp bf973840 error 4 in icewm[8048000+97000]
What I'm looking at?
'got some doupts, while it would be nice if someone could confirm...
Please, easy on the HW specs, RAM/HDD and ISO MD5 are tested and good. All pups are Ubuntu based, different 32bit versions.
What could cause "random" segfaults?
So you want us to guess
Hi torm,
You've told us that various 'Ubuntu-based' Puppies produce various segfaults on various computers, but have instructed us to "Please, easy on the HW specs, RAM/HDD and ISO MD5".
We can only know what you tell us. Without specifics --such as HW specs, RAM/HD and ISO MD5's-- let's see, what could it be?
1. Your house is invested with cock-roaches that have gotten into your computers occasionally shorting out you system.
2. Cat hairs occasionally shorting out your system.
3. Faulty electrical wiring.
4. A "blivit" -- you've somehow stuffed 2 Gb's of applications into a 1 Gb SaveFile.
5. You've installed something into all the systems which interferes with how each systems is supposed to work.
6. Gremlins -- I know people will tell you that they don't exist. But when I put my socks in a clothes washer, they eat holes into them. And if I buy a lot of socks so I don't have to feed the gremlins once a week, other mysterious occurrences take place.
mikesLr
You've told us that various 'Ubuntu-based' Puppies produce various segfaults on various computers, but have instructed us to "Please, easy on the HW specs, RAM/HDD and ISO MD5".
We can only know what you tell us. Without specifics --such as HW specs, RAM/HD and ISO MD5's-- let's see, what could it be?
1. Your house is invested with cock-roaches that have gotten into your computers occasionally shorting out you system.
2. Cat hairs occasionally shorting out your system.
3. Faulty electrical wiring.
4. A "blivit" -- you've somehow stuffed 2 Gb's of applications into a 1 Gb SaveFile.
5. You've installed something into all the systems which interferes with how each systems is supposed to work.
6. Gremlins -- I know people will tell you that they don't exist. But when I put my socks in a clothes washer, they eat holes into them. And if I buy a lot of socks so I don't have to feed the gremlins once a week, other mysterious occurrences take place.
mikesLr
if 5. then maybe Gimp.. or IceWM.
On Tahr606 I don't think I managed to install anything.. prior to errors.
All installed "frugal" with savefolder(with at least 10+GB free)
.. while freememapplet_tray and Partview appear to show (few GB) different numbers.. ?
btw.Re-installing Tahr602 on separate partition throws no errors.
HP-Mini (only use it for backups) with JWM shows no similar errors,
so I tend to suspect IceWM stuffing around in memory?
Aside from Gremlins and socks, what else these kernel messages tell you?
On Tahr606 I don't think I managed to install anything.. prior to errors.
All installed "frugal" with savefolder(with at least 10+GB free)
.. while freememapplet_tray and Partview appear to show (few GB) different numbers.. ?
btw.Re-installing Tahr602 on separate partition throws no errors.
HP-Mini (only use it for backups) with JWM shows no similar errors,
so I tend to suspect IceWM stuffing around in memory?
Aside from Gremlins and socks, what else these kernel messages tell you?
Hi Torm,
I'd suspect Icewm as it's not really maintained on this forum. So if an old version is installed, it may not be compatible with newer Puppies. And while Puppies may be binary compatible with other distros, they're not identical. Installing from other distros' repos may pull in 'dependencies' which aren't compatible.
If you like Icewm, take a look at radky's FbBox. http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 018#769018. That star on the Taskbar is a launcher for your favorite applications --i.e., you choose which.
There's a way to test if gimp is causing a problem. Uninstall it and try portable-gimp. http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 426#464426
There's another possibility. I see you are using a SaveFolder. I use them myself once I know that the applications I install aren't going to cause a problem with the system or other installed applications; that is, after an application has been tested on the specific Puppy variation with a SaveFile.
I always take the following precautions: Operate with Automatic Save removed; setting Puppy Package Manager to download (No install) to tmpfs; installing new applications only immediately after rebooting and especially before surfing the web. Despite this, from time to time, for no apparent reason, some applications or parts of an application would make it into a SaveFolder. As PPM wouldn't have cataloged them in /root/.packages it also couldn't uninstall them. Ergo my employment of SaveFiles to test applications.
Often, I'll stick with a SaveFile, never rebuilding with a SaveFolder. Disregarding Wine and programs installed into it, my most "fleshed out" Puppies --64-bits with 32-bit framework installed (SFS converted to a pet), plus Qt and python also installed, operate with a 2 Gb SaveFile of which 500+ Mbs of storage remain unused. All recent Puppies can load/unload-on-the-fly SFSes of RAM/Storage hogs such as LibreOffice. Newer "Ubuntu based" Puppies, such as Tahrpup64 and XenialPup64, can make use of many of the AppImages which are now available for many applications. See, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 732#949732.
Until recently, I've used wine-portable, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 297#755297 which also takes up little space in a SaveFile -- just enough for a couple of bash-scripts and desktop files. Exploring possibly useful XP programs the wine container within wine-portable on /mnt/home grew to 32 Gbs. But, I've realized that I could substitute Linux applications for all but one of the xp programs I actually use. So my recent Puppies have used greendome's Wine 2 with only that one actually-used program installed.
If you need a lot of space for Windows programs, you can still accomplish that without using Wine-portable. After installing and configuring wine, move /root/.wine to /mnt/home and symlink it back.
At any rate, at least for testing new applications, SaveFiles are safer than SaveFolders.
mikesLr
I'd suspect Icewm as it's not really maintained on this forum. So if an old version is installed, it may not be compatible with newer Puppies. And while Puppies may be binary compatible with other distros, they're not identical. Installing from other distros' repos may pull in 'dependencies' which aren't compatible.
If you like Icewm, take a look at radky's FbBox. http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 018#769018. That star on the Taskbar is a launcher for your favorite applications --i.e., you choose which.
There's a way to test if gimp is causing a problem. Uninstall it and try portable-gimp. http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 426#464426
There's another possibility. I see you are using a SaveFolder. I use them myself once I know that the applications I install aren't going to cause a problem with the system or other installed applications; that is, after an application has been tested on the specific Puppy variation with a SaveFile.
I always take the following precautions: Operate with Automatic Save removed; setting Puppy Package Manager to download (No install) to tmpfs; installing new applications only immediately after rebooting and especially before surfing the web. Despite this, from time to time, for no apparent reason, some applications or parts of an application would make it into a SaveFolder. As PPM wouldn't have cataloged them in /root/.packages it also couldn't uninstall them. Ergo my employment of SaveFiles to test applications.
Often, I'll stick with a SaveFile, never rebuilding with a SaveFolder. Disregarding Wine and programs installed into it, my most "fleshed out" Puppies --64-bits with 32-bit framework installed (SFS converted to a pet), plus Qt and python also installed, operate with a 2 Gb SaveFile of which 500+ Mbs of storage remain unused. All recent Puppies can load/unload-on-the-fly SFSes of RAM/Storage hogs such as LibreOffice. Newer "Ubuntu based" Puppies, such as Tahrpup64 and XenialPup64, can make use of many of the AppImages which are now available for many applications. See, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 732#949732.
Until recently, I've used wine-portable, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 297#755297 which also takes up little space in a SaveFile -- just enough for a couple of bash-scripts and desktop files. Exploring possibly useful XP programs the wine container within wine-portable on /mnt/home grew to 32 Gbs. But, I've realized that I could substitute Linux applications for all but one of the xp programs I actually use. So my recent Puppies have used greendome's Wine 2 with only that one actually-used program installed.
If you need a lot of space for Windows programs, you can still accomplish that without using Wine-portable. After installing and configuring wine, move /root/.wine to /mnt/home and symlink it back.
At any rate, at least for testing new applications, SaveFiles are safer than SaveFolders.
mikesLr
Right. FbBox is openbox + fbpanel. But you haven't added in radky's genius which turned that combination into a really useful and beautiful and highly user-customizable desktop environment.
Don't know what you mean by "Does savefile look any different from savefile to lfs?"
I'm not paranoid about wine because (a) I obtain setup files from trusted sources and it's pretty hard to corrupt a setup file; and (b) don't use window web-browsers whose security flaws are the major source of malware infestation. But, as I mentioned, there's only one program I actually need. Last year I even did my taxes running Linux.
The one program is InfoCentral, written in 1998, an object oriented relational database, that holds about 20 years of notes which, if converted to a format that a Linux or even Windows program could use, would loose most of the connections established under the relational database.
mikesLr
Don't know what you mean by "Does savefile look any different from savefile to lfs?"
I'm not paranoid about wine because (a) I obtain setup files from trusted sources and it's pretty hard to corrupt a setup file; and (b) don't use window web-browsers whose security flaws are the major source of malware infestation. But, as I mentioned, there's only one program I actually need. Last year I even did my taxes running Linux.
The one program is InfoCentral, written in 1998, an object oriented relational database, that holds about 20 years of notes which, if converted to a format that a Linux or even Windows program could use, would loose most of the connections established under the relational database.
mikesLr
Made some "clean" installs.. without anything added.
For now I get the impression that there's some problems with 605/606, while
TahrPup602noPAE(32bit) appears to work without segmentation issues.
Where's the difference?
Only thing I've noticed, was xorgwizard acting a bit differently.. I could be
wrong here, don't know
Portable Gimp looks good, even the translation to local language works OOTB.
For now I get the impression that there's some problems with 605/606, while
TahrPup602noPAE(32bit) appears to work without segmentation issues.
Where's the difference?
Only thing I've noticed, was xorgwizard acting a bit differently.. I could be
wrong here, don't know
Portable Gimp looks good, even the translation to local language works OOTB.