Want to debug this?

[woodb...@gmail.com]

Maybe you can motivate me to debug the following scenario:

Gcc-built version of my middle tier asserts

assert(!pendingTransactions.empty());

in transitional context.

If I start the back tier, start clang-built middle tier
and then run some tests, everything works fine.

If I start the back tier, start gcc-built middle tier
and then run some tests, everything again works fine.

If I start the back tier, start clang-built middle tier,
run some tests, stop clang-built middle tier and start
gcc-built middle tier and run the tests, it asserts as
mentioned.

If I start the back tier, start gcc-built middle tier,
run some tests, stop gcc-built middle tier and start
clang-built middle tier and run some tests everything
works fine. If I go on and stop clang-built middle
tier and start gcc-built middle tier and run tests,
the assert happens.

I'm not sure if it's worth debugging. I'm using gcc
4.8.1 and clang 3.3 on Linux. I have a machine that
has gcc 4.8.2 on it, but haven't tested it on there.
I've been thinking of moving to newer software (OS
and compilers) on the machine I have the problem on,
so the "problem" might go away that way too.


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust.
http://webEbenezer.net

[Leigh Johnston]

On 06/12/2013 23:06, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:

Hello Mr Homophobic Bigoted Idiot.

Your posts are inane as they require insight into your code which nobody
except yourself has insight into. You seem to be blissfully unaware of
this fact. Even if we ignore this crucial oversight one still has to
wonder why you think anyone would learn your code and debug it for you
for free.

Here is a clue: create a simple dependency free test case which
manifests your problem and can be compiled by anyone without the need to
download megabytes of crap.

>
>
> Brian
> Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust.

There is no God Mr Homophobic Bigoted Idiot. *You* trust your own
*delusion*.

L.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Friday, December 6, 2013 5:06:24 PM UTC-6, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:

>
> If I start the back tier, start gcc-built middle tier,
> run some tests, stop gcc-built middle tier and start
> clang-built middle tier and run some tests everything
> works fine.

On further analysis I'm able to produce the problem
with a clang-built middle tier sometimes.

I'm not able to reproduce it when I keep the middle
tier running though. It only happens after I've stopped
the middle tier and restarted it.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Friday, December 6, 2013 5:57:45 PM UTC-6, Leigh Johnston wrote:
>
> Your posts are inane as they require insight into your code which nobody
> except yourself has insight into. You seem to be blissfully unaware of
> this fact. Even if we ignore this crucial oversight one still has to
> wonder why you think anyone would learn your code and debug it for you
> for free.

Perhaps because they think what I'm working on is interesting.
Some may be waiting for a ship more to their liking to come
along and others may realize that's unlikely.

>
> Here is a clue: create a simple dependency free test case which
> manifests your problem and can be compiled by anyone without the need to
> download megabytes of crap.
>

I don't have megabytes of anything to download. The downloadable
part is currently 21,148 bytes.

[Leigh Johnston]

Middle tier? Are you baking a fucking cake?

Nobody has a clue as to what you are fucking talking about, idiot!

Take your medication.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, December 7, 2013 7:34:41 AM UTC-6, Leigh Johnston wrote:

Please don't swear here. I was thinking, "At least Leigh
hasn't been swearing here" before that post.

I have a 3-tier system. The back and middle tiers are
servers. The front tier exits after it has either
succeeded or failed. I think a lot of people here
know that and those that don't could find it on my
website.


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises -
"Because you have a mother and a father :-)" from
"The Design and Evolution of C++"

[Ike Naar]

On 2013-12-07, woodb...@gmail.com <woodb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a 3-tier system. The back and middle tiers are
> servers.

The front tier is not a server?

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, December 7, 2013 4:22:59 PM UTC-6, Ike Naar wrote:

> The front tier is not a server?
>

Correct. It runs and then exits.

I may be having some file system corruption. Today
I noticed a couple of files in my directory with
goofy names and both are over a megabyte in size.
The files were created yesterday when I was testing
this stuff. This is kind of pushing me towards
moving to a newer OS. I think I've been on this
version of the OS for over 5 months.

[Qu0ll]

"Leigh Johnston" wrote in message
news:Z-adnbJNFbDn-T_P...@giganews.com...

> Hello Mr Homophobic Bigoted Idiot.

Gosh Leigh, I think most people would find such an opening statement very
offensive. Should we commence replies to you with "Hello Mr Incredibly
Offensive Moron" from now on?

>> Brian
> Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust.
>
> There is no God Mr Homophobic Bigoted Idiot. *You* trust your own
> *delusion*.

I am not sure how you extrapolated all this from a signature which refers to
"G-d". But again, very offensive.

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
Qu0llS...@gmail.com
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me]

[Leigh Johnston]

On 07/12/2013 23:54, Qu0ll wrote:
> "Leigh Johnston" wrote in message
> news:Z-adnbJNFbDn-T_P...@giganews.com...
>
>> Hello Mr Homophobic Bigoted Idiot.
>
> Gosh Leigh, I think most people would find such an opening statement
> very offensive. Should we commence replies to you with "Hello Mr
> Incredibly Offensive Moron" from now on?

You are the moron; obviously I am calling him that based on PREVIOUS
posts he has made in this Usenet group.

>
>>> Brian
>> Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust.
>>
>> There is no God Mr Homophobic Bigoted Idiot. *You* trust your own
>> *delusion*.
>
> I am not sure how you extrapolated all this from a signature which
> refers to "G-d". But again, very offensive.

I didn't, instead YOU made an erroneous assumption.

/Leigh

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, December 7, 2013 5:54:04 PM UTC-6, Qu0ll wrote:
>
> Gosh Leigh, I think most people would find such an opening statement very
> offensive.

I think he disagrees with the idea that children deserve
to have a father and mother.

http://www.dennisprager.com/mary-cheney-liz-cheney-left-wing-hate/

[Qu0ll]

"Leigh Johnston" wrote in message

news:2MudnXGQtvSiXD7P...@giganews.com...

> You are the moron; obviously I am calling him that based on PREVIOUS posts
> he has made in this Usenet group.

Before you call me a moron again (and note that I never actually called you
one), would you like to consider that perhaps my reference to "moron" was
based on PREVIOUS posts of yours too?

Anyone for a bit of "gloy gum" or "Slartibartfast"? Perhaps "Sausages" are
more to your liking? ROFL.

[Leigh Johnston]

On 08/12/2013 02:28, Qu0ll wrote:
> "Leigh Johnston" wrote in message
> news:2MudnXGQtvSiXD7P...@giganews.com...
>
>> You are the moron; obviously I am calling him that based on PREVIOUS
>> posts he has made in this Usenet group.
>
> Before you call me a moron again (and note that I never actually called
> you one), would you like to consider that perhaps my reference to
> "moron" was based on PREVIOUS posts of yours too?
>
> Anyone for a bit of "gloy gum" or "Slartibartfast"? Perhaps "Sausages"
> are more to your liking? ROFL.

ROFL? That is the correct response to those posts which are meant to be
humorous unlike Brian's posts which are bigoted and homophobic.

Get a fucking clue mate.

/Leigh

[Qu0ll]

"Leigh Johnston" wrote in message

news:8o-dnUjhnvyAEDnP...@giganews.com...

> ROFL? That is the correct response to those posts which are meant to be
> humorous unlike Brian's posts which are bigoted and homophobic.

> Get a fucking clue mate.

ROFL!

[Juha Nieminen]

woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> I think he disagrees with the idea that children deserve
> to have a father and mother.

Yeah. Children should be removed from single parents and given to foster
homes. That'll teach them.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---

[Qu0ll]

"Juha Nieminen" wrote in message news:l842tm$tn3$1...@adenine.netfront.net...

> Yeah. Children should be removed from single parents and given to foster
> homes. That'll teach them.

And what exactly does this have to do with the article that was posted with
the comment you attempted to ridicule?

[David Brown]

On 09/12/13 10:49, Qu0ll wrote:
> "Juha Nieminen" wrote in message news:l842tm$tn3$1...@adenine.netfront.net...
>
>> Yeah. Children should be removed from single parents and given to foster
>> homes. That'll teach them.
>
> And what exactly does this have to do with the article that was posted
> with the comment you attempted to ridicule?
>

(Obviously this post is for many people here, not just you.)

Could this be moved to a different thread? I enjoy an off-topic
discussion like this as much as the next person, and I think that
ridiculous ideas should be ridiculed (but one should not necessarily
ridicule the person with those ideas). But perhaps Brian should also be
allowed to have a thread about C++ without it descending into
name-calling and a repeat of exactly the same points from before?

[Juha Nieminen]

Qu0ll <Qu0llS...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Juha Nieminen" wrote in message news:l842tm$tn3$1...@adenine.netfront.net...
>
>> Yeah. Children should be removed from single parents and given to foster
>> homes. That'll teach them.
>
> And what exactly does this have to do with the article that was posted with
> the comment you attempted to ridicule?

Did I quote the link? No. Then why are you assuming I was saying antying
about that link?

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, December 7, 2013 4:49:37 PM UTC-6, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> This is kind of pushing me towards
> moving to a newer OS. I think I've been on this
> version of the OS for over 5 months.

I wound up going to an older version of Linux in Debian.

I rebuilt all three tiers on Debian and tested them on
Debian. I couldn't reproduce the problem when running
on Debian.

Then I copied the Debian-built files to a Fedora machine
where I had originally encountered the problem. The
problem still occurred on Fedora. The Fedora machine
has an alpha or beta version of Fedora on it and my
guess is it has a TCP related bug.

[Geoff]

Generally speaking, it's a Bad Idea(tm) to copy binaries from one
edition of Linux (Debian) to another (Fedora). The results are
unpredictable since they may not share a common ABI. It can be done
successfully but doing so while trying to "debug" your stated problem
is just adding another kind of potential error into the scenario.

Instead, you should copy your sources over and build your projects on
each platform. This is why package management exists.

"Alpha or beta" version is meaningless in this context. The current
stable supported release of Fedora is 19. Fedora 20 is available in
alpha and beta releases but why would you introduce yet another set of
problems into the mix?

In your original problem statement you also say you're using clang and
gcc projects. Why? If they share libraries you are running the risk of
ABI incompatibility again. Choose a tool (clang) and bring your
gcc-compiled project up to date and compile all your related projects
with the same tools.

[Jorgen Grahn]

On Sun, 2013-12-15, Geoff wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Dec 2013 09:31:17 -0800 (PST), woodb...@gmail.com wrote:

...

>>Then I copied the Debian-built files to a Fedora machine
>>where I had originally encountered the problem. The
>>problem still occurred on Fedora. The Fedora machine
>>has an alpha or beta version of Fedora on it and my
>>guess is it has a TCP related bug.

> Generally speaking, it's a Bad Idea(tm) to copy binaries from one
> edition of Linux (Debian) to another (Fedora). The results are
> unpredictable since they may not share a common ABI.

Are you reasonably sure about that? Any references?

The main burden of keeping things sane lies on the library writers.
When an incompatible version of e.g. the Gnu libc comes out, they must
step the .so file's revision number. (Somehow. The details are
unclear to me.) Then your program will fail to run unless the right
version of libc is available.

It's possible that Fedora takes libfoo version X from upstream and
modifies it so it's not compatible with the Debian build of libfoo
version X ... or modifies the compiler so that it generates such an
incompatibility. But that seems to me rather unlikely since it means
messing with the rather delicate upstream ABI decisions. If you're
Fedora, your can only switch ABIs when the upstream does it, and then
you're stuck with that decision until they release libfoo version X+1.

...

> Instead, you should copy your sources over and build your projects on
> each platform. This is why package management exists.

I agree that is the sane and normal way of doing it. And yes, that
also means I'm not sure you are wrong.

/Jorgen

--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .

[Chris Vine]

On 15 Dec 2013 20:57:00 GMT

Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-12-15, Geoff wrote:
> > On Sun, 15 Dec 2013 09:31:17 -0800 (PST), woodb...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
> ...
> >>Then I copied the Debian-built files to a Fedora machine
> >>where I had originally encountered the problem. The
> >>problem still occurred on Fedora. The Fedora machine
> >>has an alpha or beta version of Fedora on it and my
> >>guess is it has a TCP related bug.
>
> > Generally speaking, it's a Bad Idea(tm) to copy binaries from one
> > edition of Linux (Debian) to another (Fedora). The results are
> > unpredictable since they may not share a common ABI.
>
> Are you reasonably sure about that? Any references?
>
> The main burden of keeping things sane lies on the library writers.
> When an incompatible version of e.g. the Gnu libc comes out, they must
> step the .so file's revision number. (Somehow. The details are
> unclear to me.) Then your program will fail to run unless the right
> version of libc is available.

libtool does all that for you, assuming the library concerned uses
libtool (as most do), in combination with the -version-info link flag.

> It's possible that Fedora takes libfoo version X from upstream and
> modifies it so it's not compatible with the Debian build of libfoo
> version X ... or modifies the compiler so that it generates such an
> incompatibility. But that seems to me rather unlikely since it means
> messing with the rather delicate upstream ABI decisions. If you're
> Fedora, your can only switch ABIs when the upstream does it, and then
> you're stuck with that decision until they release libfoo version X+1.

> > Instead, you should copy your sources over and build your projects
> > on each platform. This is why package management exists.
>
> I agree that is the sane and normal way of doing it. And yes, that
> also means I'm not sure you are wrong.

You are asking for trouble if you don't rebuild for different linux
distributions.

Not all libraries use libtool versioning and not all libraries are
adequately strict about keeping binary compatibility between versions
with the same libtool version number even where they do. With C++
libraries it can be extremely difficult to know when you are breaking
binary compatibility for a particular compiler, and breaking of the ODR
rule for inline C++ functions is commonplace - in most cases this
doesn't matter, but depending on the linker it might. (Every time you
modify an inline function in a library header you risk breaking the ODR
rule unless all code which includes the header is rebuilt: but in most
cases this breach is technical only and distributions will not rebuild
for this.)

Furthermore, even those projects which correctly maintain binary
compatibility between major releases only guarantee compatibility going
from lower to higher version numbers, and not the reverse (there is no
inhibition on adding adding new symbols with later versions - the
inhibition is on removing symbols). So if you try to use a binary
compiled with one distribution on another, and the other uses an
earlier version of a particular library, you might be stuffed for that
reason.

Not all distributions even use the same libc (fedora uses glibc, ubuntu
and debian use eglibc).

Distributions will rebuild when they need to, not when other
distributions need to. In addition, some distributions use patched
versions of libraries which might conceivably differ in binary
compatibilty from the unpatched upstream version (which is fine for the
distribution concerned).

You will minimise the risk of trouble of course if you do static
builds. However, not all libraries will build statically (the GTK+
tool chain found on ubuntu and fedora will not).

Chris

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, December 15, 2013 12:20:58 PM UTC-6, Geoff wrote:
>
> Generally speaking, it's a Bad Idea(tm) to copy binaries from one
> edition of Linux (Debian) to another (Fedora). The results are
> unpredictable since they may not share a common ABI. It can be done
> successfully but doing so while trying to "debug" your stated problem
> is just adding another kind of potential error into the scenario.
>
>
> Instead, you should copy your sources over and build your projects on
> each platform. This is why package management exists.

I have one production machine and a couple of development
machines. As a security measure, I don't copy sources
for the back tier to the production machine. Up until
a few days ago both the production and development
machines had Fedora 20 installs on them. Anyway, I tend
to keep the development and production machines within
a release of each other and haven't encountered problems
from doing things that way.

I only introduced the Debian install in order to
investigate the problem.

>
> In your original problem statement you also say you're using clang and
> gcc projects. Why? If they share libraries you are running the risk of
> ABI incompatibility again. Choose a tool (clang) and bring your
> gcc-compiled project up to date and compile all your related projects
> with the same tools.

I haven't so far been able to make a decision between clang
and gcc. I've continued to use both in part to figure out
which one I thought was better. On Debian, the compilers
are clang 3.0-6.2 and gcc 4.7.2-5. My software only builds
with gcc on Debian, but on Fedora it builds with both
compilers.

[Melzzzzz]

On Sun, 15 Dec 2013 16:17:02 -0800 (PST)
woodb...@gmail.com wrote:

>
> I haven't so far been able to make a decision between clang
> and gcc.

Stick with gcc as it more mature (has less bugs).
I have bad experience with clang and FreeBSD 10...



--
There are more things in heaven and earth,
Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
-- Wm. Shakespeare, "Hamlet"

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, December 15, 2013 6:17:02 PM UTC-6, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> a few days ago both the production and development
> machines had Fedora 20 installs on them.

Oops, one of my machines has Fedora 19 on it.

[Geoff]

On 15 Dec 2013 20:57:00 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se>
wrote:

That's OK. I'm not sure I'm right. :) I only know that if I'm
debugging a system, I don't go around transplanting it onto other
systems to see what else will break besides the problem I'm working on
already. That way lies madness...

[Scott Lurndal]

woodb...@gmail.com writes:
>On Sunday, December 15, 2013 12:20:58 PM UTC-6, Geoff wrote:
>>
>> Generally speaking, it's a Bad Idea(tm) to copy binaries from one
>> edition of Linux (Debian) to another (Fedora). The results are
>> unpredictable since they may not share a common ABI. It can be done
>> successfully but doing so while trying to "debug" your stated problem
>> is just adding another kind of potential error into the scenario.
>>
>>
>> Instead, you should copy your sources over and build your projects on
>> each platform. This is why package management exists.
>
>I have one production machine and a couple of development
>machines. As a security measure, I don't copy sources
>for the back tier to the production machine.

He's not suggesting that you build on your production machine. Fire
up a VM on the development machine, install the same release software
as the production machine (you do have automated deployment tools, right?)
and build your software packages on the VM. Then copy the RPM's over to
the production machine (which should be running RHEL or derivitives
such as CentOS/Scientific Linux, not Fedora).