Re: fseeko() on reference file: Invalid argument (Was: Bug#876840: staden-io-lib FTBFS on non-i386 32bit: FAIL: java) (original) (raw)
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
- To: Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu>, 876840@bugs.debian.org
- Cc: Debian Mentors List <debian-mentors@lists.debian.org>
- Subject: Re: fseeko() on reference file: Invalid argument (Was: Bug#876840: staden-io-lib FTBFS on non-i386 32bit: FAIL: java)
- From: Christian Seiler <christian@iwakd.de>
- Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 22:38:12 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 50d25420-247d-4d3d-36c7-6cb688b167b9@iwakd.de>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20170926200803.tu3ek2w4hxsosm7s@an3as.eu>
- References: <150641811896.17283.1679524243799277217.reportbug@localhost> <[🔎] 20170926200803.tu3ek2w4hxsosm7s@an3as.eu>
Hi Andreas,
On 09/26/2017 10:08 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
I need to admit I have no idea why
fseeko() on reference file: Invalid argument
is happening on some architectures.
According to the manpage of fseek(), which is identical to fseeko() apart from the offset data type:
ERRORS [...] EINVAL The whence argument to fseek() was not SEEK_SET, SEEK_END, or SEEK_CUR. Or: the resulting file offset would be negative.
I suspect that something is calling fseeko() with a negative offset.
I'd recommend doing an strace on the specific test binary that fails on a porterbox (e.g. armhf) + on amd64 for comparison and then look for the offending fseeko() call. That might help isolate the issue.
Regards, Christian
Reply to:
- References:
- Prev by Date:Re: Bug#876839: staden-io-lib FTBFS on big endian: error: invalid operands to binary &
- Next by Date:Bug#876798: marked as done (RFS: nixnote2/2.0.2-1)
- Previous by thread:fseeko() on reference file: Invalid argument (Was: Bug#876840: staden-io-lib FTBFS on non-i386 32bit: FAIL: java)
- Next by thread:Bug#876991: RFS: proxychains-ng/4.12-1 [ITP]
- Index(es):