On 7/25/2012 9:52 AM, Tobias Dinse wrote:
> Ok, I compiled our 5.0.2 Version of Bacula and attached the new 
> report. I hope this time its better  bu I can still see an ????.
>
> I also tried to use 5.2.10 with 2 test machines. Both give the same 
> error as 5.0.2 :(
>

Check the actual CFLAGS being used. The SIGSEGV may be due to glibc's 
buffer overrun protection being inadvertently turned on with the 
-DFORTIFY_SOURCE flag in CFLAGS.  This is particularly true if you are 
using a package builder rather than configure/make against the source 
tarball. At one time, bacula-sd caused a false positive hit of glibc's 
buffer overrun protection. I don't know if that is still the case, but 
it may well be.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users