Lonny Selinger wrote:

...

I'm not sure what has happened but for some reason my CentOS 4 system is showing me using default threads??

# getconf GNU_LIBPTHREAD_VERSION linuxthreads-0.10

# uname -rimpv 2.6.9-42.0.10.EL #1 Tue Feb 27 09:24:42 EST 2007 i686 athlon i386

I could have sworn it used to show:

NPTL 2.3.4

Mine do

...

Like a couple other machines. Any ideas what might have changed this or how I get it back??? the devel package for NPTL is installed but from my understanding that has little to do with why getconf is showing this. I'm feeling new here :-)

[summer@bilby ~]$ ssh cdm rpm -qif $(type -p getconf) Name : glibc-common Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 2.3.4 Vendor: CentOS Release : 2.25 Build Date: Sat Aug 12 19:52:27 2006 Install Date: Tue Sep 5 01:47:21 2006 Build Host: build-i386 Group : System Environment/Base Source RPM: glibc-2.3.4-2.25.src.rpm Size : 59306351 License: LGPL Signature : DSA/SHA1, Sat Aug 12 22:08:33 2006, Key ID a53d0bab443e1821 Packager : Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org Summary : Common binaries and locale data for glibc Description : The glibc-common package includes common binaries for the GNU libc libraries, as well as national language (locale) support. [summer@bilby ~]$

Cheers John

Thanks John ... at least you've confirmed I'm not crazy:

Name : glibc-common Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 2.3.4 Vendor: CentOS Release : 2.25 Build Date: Sat 12 Aug 2006 05:52:27 AM CST Install Date: Mon 05 Mar 2007 06:18:49 PM CST Build Host: build-i386 Group : System Environment/Base Source RPM: glibc-2.3.4-2.25.src.rpm Size : 59306351 License: LGPL Signature : DSA/SHA1, Sat 12 Aug 2006 08:08:33 AM CST, Key ID a53d0bab443e1821 Packager : Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org Summary : Common binaries and locale data for glibc Description : The glibc-common package includes common binaries for the GNU libc libraries, as well as national language (locale) support.

I still don't know why all of a sudden NPTL dissapeared :-( I'll keep banging my head and see what rattles loose

-- Lonny

Lonny Selinger wrote:

...

...

Lonny Selinger wrote:

...

I'm not sure what has happened but for some reason my CentOS 4 system is showing me using default threads??

# getconf GNU_LIBPTHREAD_VERSION linuxthreads-0.10

# uname -rimpv 2.6.9-42.0.10.EL #1 Tue Feb 27 09:24:42 EST 2007 i686 athlon i386

I could have sworn it used to show:

NPTL 2.3.4

Mine do

...

Like a couple other machines. Any ideas what might have changed this or how I get it back??? the devel package for NPTL is installed but from my understanding that has little to do with why getconf is showing this. I'm feeling new here :-)

[summer@bilby ~]$ ssh cdm rpm -qif $(type -p getconf) Name : glibc-common Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 2.3.4 Vendor: CentOS Release : 2.25 Build Date: Sat Aug 12 19:52:27 2006 Install Date: Tue Sep 5 01:47:21 2006 Build Host: build-i386 Group : System Environment/Base Source RPM: glibc-2.3.4-2.25.src.rpm Size : 59306351 License: LGPL Signature : DSA/SHA1, Sat Aug 12 22:08:33 2006, Key ID a53d0bab443e1821 Packager : Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org Summary : Common binaries and locale data for glibc Description : The glibc-common package includes common binaries for the GNU libc libraries, as well as national language (locale) support. [summer@bilby ~]$

Cheers John

Thanks John ... at least you've confirmed I'm not crazy:

Name : glibc-common Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 2.3.4 Vendor: CentOS Release : 2.25 Build Date: Sat 12 Aug 2006 05:52:27 AM CST Install Date: Mon 05 Mar 2007 06:18:49 PM CST Build Host: build-i386 Group : System Environment/Base Source RPM: glibc-2.3.4-2.25.src.rpm Size : 59306351 License: LGPL Signature : DSA/SHA1, Sat 12 Aug 2006 08:08:33 AM CST, Key ID a53d0bab443e1821 Packager : Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org Summary : Common binaries and locale data for glibc Description : The glibc-common package includes common binaries for the GNU libc libraries, as well as national language (locale) support.

I still don't know why all of a sudden NPTL dissapeared :-( I'll keep banging my head and see what rattles loose

rpm -V

Thanks again John. Just in case anyone else ever runs into this. I had installed an app that mentioned that /lib/tls needed to be moved for the app to run as is had a flaw in it. This was a quick install I found on a site somewhere ... eventually (last night) I read the official documentation which specified that the flaw was in the patch provided quite a while ago for 2.4 kernels NOT the 2.6 branch.

In my case, /lib/tls was moved to /lib/tls.old and never paid attention to again ... until this problem. Running the RPM verify against glibc showed that there were horrific changes even once I had moved /lib/tls.old back to /lib/tls as I had upgraded glibc and other accompanying apps and packages while /lib/tls was gone.

As this machine is a kick toy right now it was pretty simple to reinstall (which I was aplnning anyway) but I'm assuming it _may_ have been possible to do a force install of the last upgrades I had done to try to correct the issue WITH /lib/tls in place.

Side note, are rollbacks supported/implemented at all in CentOS 4 (or upcoming 5) ? I know there are snapshots implemented in the management and prvisioning modules for RHEL through rhn, just wondering if there's a similar machanism that can be enabled for CentOS. I'm assuming there is with yum I'm just weening off of up2date now ;P

Thanks again!!

-- Lonny

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 09:09:49AM -0600, Lonny Selinger wrote:

...

Thanks again John. Just in case anyone else ever runs into this. I had installed an app that mentioned that /lib/tls needed to be moved for the app to run as is had a flaw in it. This was a quick install I found on a site somewhere ... eventually (last night) I read the official documentation which specified that the flaw was in the patch provided quite a while ago for 2.4 kernels NOT the 2.6 branch.

Never, ever, not even one, play with /lib :)

Unless, of course, you enjoy stuff like self flagelation. Then again, it takes all kinds ... :)

LOL ... actually I play with lib lots. This time however I didn't do any failsafes :/ like creating a "playground" account with static libs and it's own LIBPATH in a little chroot env. Becasue it was a kick toy I figured "if it chokes I'll rebuild it" ... all the while thinking "yeah but what would I do to make it choke? every time I've monkeyed with things I've survived and brought the box back from the dead" .... I should know to never get cocky .... live and learn :D

-- L