mandos general protection error ...

[Dick Middleton]

Teddy Hogeborn wrote:

>> Should I understand from this query that you've tried the tests on
>> sid and been unable to reproduce?
> 
> Sadly, yes. 

Bummer!

> Now, we've added some more debugging code to the latest server code,
> where we now suspect the problem lies.  Could you try it again? 

Yes, I'll try to do it tomorrow.

> We would also be interested in seeing the "dpkg --get-selections"

> output from any system where you ran these commands and the server
> failed.

OK

> On another note; I suspect from clues in the strace logs that you're
> not using ext3.  What file system are you using?

Mostly I use xfs but I'm fairy sure emu is ext3 (it's not running right now). 
That would be consistent with the results if problem was file system type.

geronimo and loco are both Via C3 processor (mini-itx) - that seems to me to be 
just as likely to have an effect as fs type and it would be consistent with 
observations too as failing server has always been on one of those.

> We haven't tested
> installing a system with something like xfs, so if you have a sid
> system using ext3 you could test on,

No I don't but I can probably create a ext3 partition to run it in.  Any problem 
with any of md, lvm, or luks?

> I also see that penguin and nova are not freshly installed sid or
> lenny systems, but are upgraded from etch or older.

Penguin started life as Debian 3.1 and has been through many upgrades of h/w and 
s/w.  Nova is a bit newer, always unstable but pre-sid.

Loco is a new fresh sid and geronimo was etch and is now lenny.

>  Do you have a
> freshly installed lenny/sid system to test on?

Loco and emu are both recent, otherwise not easily but I'll think about it.

Dick