More info on this: It seems that PBM_REALLOC in rpmdb/rpmdb.c is the culprit; asking for huge memory amounts. On a normal i386 box, you see the region starts out as 176k and after many iterations as it goes through the package listing, it eventually grows to about 3MB, while growing about 50% each time. On the PPC, it starts out at a whopping 8MB(!!!) and more than doubles each iteration, so after maybe four iterations it is up to 250MB and then it fails. Does this trigger an "Oh, I know what it is!" for anybody.... ? Paul. On 4/26/05, Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I was wondering if anyone is aware of any issues regarding > reading/using /var/lib/rpm/* db files on a big endian machine (e.g. > PPC) that were generated on an ix86 host? A simple "rpm -qa" run on > the PPC lists off about 25 packages and then fails with: > > memory alloc (260046852 bytes) returned NULL. > > which in hex is $F800004. (This happens when it > > I noted that "file" listed the db files as being little endian, and > based on what I'd read, I did a: > > /usr/lib/rpm/rpmdb_dump $i.le | /usr/lib/rpm/rpmdb_load $i > > after which "file" reports them as being in native endian format; > however the result from "rpm -qa" is identical. > > Searching the archives, I found: > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/rpm-list/2003-May/msg00227.html > > where it says: > ---------------------------------------------------- > I believe (but have never testsed, Red Hat didn't have any big-endian platforms > in it's current product line for a couple years, go figger) that rpm databases > can be accessed from other arches (again, not through NFS, but possible > through sunrpc). > > There are 3 layers of compatibility, 2 are known to be there already: > a) Berkeley DB is endian neutral. > b) Package headers are always big-endian > c) join keys for inverted list indices. > > The join keys in c) are 1 or 2 ints that used to be native-endian. I believe > I have the byte swaps in place for the join keys, can/will certainly > get you a fix if you show me a problem that I can reproduce. > ---------------------------------------------------- > > I was wondering if this is something that is known to be > broken/unsupported, or if it should simply work. I've noted that > other rpm functions seem broke against these LE db files too (e.g. > "rpm -qf /bin/bash" segfaults). > > Thanks, > Paul. > _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
