Re: [GNUnet-developers] Re: [patch] BDB crash

[Tom Barnes-Lawrence]

On Sun, May 11, 2003 at 12:43:52PM +0100, N. Durner wrote:
> Yes, it's always the same.
> Please try the attached patch and send the DEBUG-output.

  Done. BTW, I take it the other patch you just sent to the group
at large was for clearing up the first bug I reported, and you
hadn't very very suddenly fixed this one!

May 12 01:12:44 BDB: Retrieving count of entries
May 12 01:12:44 count = *
May 12 01:12:44 freeing mem
May 12 01:12:44 mem freed
May 12 01:12:44 BDB: Retrieving count of entries
May 12 01:12:44 count = *
May 12 01:12:44 freeing mem
May 12 01:12:44 mem freed
May 12 01:12:44 BDB: Retrieving count of entries
May 12 01:12:44 count = *
May 12 01:12:44 freeing mem
May 12 01:12:44 mem freed
May 12 01:12:44 BDB: Retrieving count of entries
May 12 01:12:44 count = *
May 12 01:12:44 freeing mem
May 12 01:12:44 mem freed
May 12 01:12:44 BDB: Retrieving data for key
F2E52517E63E39C552DD5328863C77ED0B308FF8May 12 01:12:44 BDB: Retrieving data
for key F2E52517E63E39C552DD5328863C77ED0B308FF8May 12 01:12:44 BDB: Storing
data with the key F2E52517E63E39C552DD5328863C77ED0B308FF8May 12 01:12:44
BDB: Retrieving count of entries
May 12 01:12:44 before lowForEachEntry
May 12 01:12:44 before memsets
May 12 01:12:44 BDB: Iterating through the database
May 12 01:12:44 cursor created: -30989

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.

 (Leaving out the backtrace as requested)

 BTW, I'm familiar enough with the _idea_ of backtraces, and I've used
gdb in my own stuff, but- why was the function #0 always unnamed?
Does that happen to function #0 in any backtrace, or does it signify
something about the function (it's looking to me like the function must
be lowForEachEntryInDatabase() but I don't see anything odd about that)?

 It'd be nice to be able to help more directly in this sort of thing.

Tomble