1 |
Kai Krakow wrote: |
2 |
> Am Sun, 19 Mar 2017 06:27:15 -0500 |
3 |
> schrieb Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com>: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> |
6 |
> |
7 |
> Here is mine: |
8 |
> |
9 |
> root@fireball / # uname -r |
10 |
> 4.5.2-gentoo |
11 |
> root@fireball / # |
12 |
> |
13 |
> As far as I know, I use bash. If you are talking about what I think |
14 |
> you are talking about. |
15 |
> Yes, that's what I was talking about. |
16 |
> |
17 |
> Run ps, it should tell you the processes running in your current shell, |
18 |
> including the shell itself: |
19 |
> |
20 |
> # ps |
21 |
> PID TTY TIME CMD |
22 |
> 1256 pts/2 00:00:00 ps |
23 |
> 32059 pts/2 00:00:00 bash |
24 |
> |
25 |
> And you can see your default shell this way: |
26 |
> |
27 |
> # realpath /bin/sh |
28 |
> /bin/dash |
29 |
> |
30 |
> Yes, dash for me, because it spawns much faster than bash, at least |
31 |
> when running scripts. This can make a big difference with openrc. |
32 |
> Meanwhile, I'm using systemd. |
33 |
|
34 |
root@fireball / # ps | grep bash |
35 |
8515 pts/0 00:00:00 bash |
36 |
root@fireball / # realpath /bin/sh |
37 |
/bin/bash |
38 |
root@fireball / # |
39 |
|
40 |
Looks like bash for me. |
41 |
|
42 |
|
43 |
>> [IP-] [ ] app-shells/bash-4.3_p48-r1:0 |
44 |
> Here, too: |
45 |
> |
46 |
> # equery list bash |
47 |
> [IP-] [ ] app-shells/bash-4.3_p48-r1:0 |
48 |
> |
49 |
>> Given the age of your kernel, maybe it is above that level anyway. I |
50 |
>> don't update my kernel often either. |
51 |
>> |
52 |
>> I'm going to be watching this thread tho. If I can share info which |
53 |
>> may help narrow things down, I'll do that for sure. |
54 |
> The problem is that this bug is totally non-deterministic... It fails |
55 |
> once, next try it works as it should. |
56 |
> |
57 |
> If you can work out a way to reliably reproduce this bug, let me know. |
58 |
> Then I'll try to work out what the problem is. |
59 |
> |
60 |
|
61 |
|
62 |
I think our other Alan posted a way to reproduce it. I see you replied |
63 |
so maybe his post will help and I'll read your reply next. Maybe if we |
64 |
share enough between several of us, we can at least rule out some stuff |
65 |
and narrow it down a bit. |
66 |
|
67 |
Dale |
68 |
|
69 |
:-) :-) |