gnunet-developers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GNUnet Name System not working (as expected)


From: Schanzenbach, Martin
Subject: Re: GNUnet Name System not working (as expected)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2022 08:29:09 +0000


> On 8. Apr 2022, at 16:02, Tanguy LE CARROUR <tanguy@bioneland.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Nikita,
> 
> 
> Quoting Nikita Ronja Gillmann (2022-04-08 12:29:43)
>> Tanguy LE CARROUR transcribed 6.2K bytes:
>>> Hello GNUnet,
>>> 
>>> I'm not reporting this into the bug tracker (yet), because (good) chances
>>> are the problem exists between the chair and keyboard…
>>> 
>>> ```
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:00.996911+0200 peerstore-sqlite-29500 ERROR Error 
>>> executing SQL query: attempt to write a readonly database
>>>  PRAGMA auto_vacuum=INCREMENTAL
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:00.997101+0200 peerstore-sqlite-29500 ERROR `sqlite3_step' 
>>> failed at plugin_peerstore_sqlite.c:211 with error: attempt to write a 
>>> readonly database
>> 
>> Where is the $HOME of the gnunet user? Is it writeable for you?
> 
> *ERF* the `sqlite.db` belonged to another user and was created… back
> in 2020!? O_o'

Yes. It is also my impression from the logs that the sqlite database is a 
problem.
It seems to be readonly for whatever reason. Try deleting it?

BR

> 
> 
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:00.997124+0200 sqlite-29500 ERROR Failed to reset sqlite 
>>> statement with error: attempt to write a readonly database
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:00.999847+0200 namestore-29495 ERROR Assertion failed at 
>>> sq_result_helper.c:180.
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:00.999877+0200 namestore-29495 ERROR Assertion failed at 
>>> plugin_namestore_sqlite.c:537.
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:00.999891+0200 namestore-29495 ERROR Assertion failed at 
>>> gnunet-service-namestore.c:1949.
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.000896+0200 transport-tcp-29503 WARNING Unexpected 
>>> address length: 24 bytes
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.000925+0200 transport-29503 ERROR Assertion failed at 
>>> gnunet-service-transport_validation.c:902.
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.000932+0200 transport-29503 ERROR Address with 24 bytes 
>>> for plugin tcp and peer DSTJ is malformed
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.000938+0200 transport-tcp-29503 WARNING Unexpected 
>>> address length: 12 bytes
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.000942+0200 transport-29503 ERROR Assertion failed at 
>>> gnunet-service-transport_validation.c:902.
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.000947+0200 transport-29503 ERROR Address with 12 bytes 
>>> for plugin tcp and peer DSTJ is malformed
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.001095+0200 transport-tcp-29503 WARNING Unexpected 
>>> address length: 24 bytes
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.001105+0200 transport-29503 ERROR Assertion failed at 
>>> gnunet-service-transport_validation.c:902.
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.001110+0200 transport-29503 ERROR Address with 24 bytes 
>>> for plugin tcp and peer V8XX is malformed
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.001114+0200 transport-tcp-29503 WARNING Unexpected 
>>> address length: 12 bytes
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.001118+0200 transport-29503 ERROR Assertion failed at 
>>> gnunet-service-transport_validation.c:902.
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.001125+0200 transport-29503 ERROR Address with 12 bytes 
>>> for plugin tcp and peer V8XX is malformed
>>> 2022-04-07T17:14:01.005084+0200 nat-29505 ERROR UPnP enabled in 
>>> configuration, but UPnP client `upnpc` command not found, disabling UPnP
>> 
>> I assume that you have upnpc(-mini?) as dependency in the guix package.
>> When you look at the C code in src/nat/ you'll see 2 files which you
>> need to patch for them to work for Guix (same applies for the cases
>> where iptables, ip6tables, and ip binaries are used).
> 
> Correct. `miniupnpc` is an `input`, not a `propagated-input`,
> so I will have to patch the files using it. Thanks for pointing out!
> 
> I'll submit a patch for the package definition.
> 
> In the meantime, I installed `miniupnpc` to make it available for `gnunet`
> to use… unfortunately, I now have the following warning:
> 
> ```
> 2022-04-08T15:50:35.608148+0200 nat-16852 WARNING upnpc failed to create port 
> mapping
> 2022-04-08T15:50:35.608229+0200 nat-16852 WARNING upnpc failed to create port 
> mapping
> ```
> 
> But, I guess, WARNING is better than ERROR! :-)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> --
> Tanguy
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]