Error org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.Spawn.ChildExited: Launch helper exited with unknown return code 127

Bug #847591 reported by Martin-Éric Racine
44
This bug affects 8 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
packagekit (Ubuntu)
Fix Released
High
Matthias Klumpp
Oneiric
Fix Released
High
Matthias Klumpp

Bug Description

The file /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/20packagekit keeps on producing the following DBUS error since a few days on Oneiric:

Error org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.Spawn.ChildExited: Launch helper exited with unknown return code 127

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 11.10
Package: packagekit 0.6.15-1build1 [modified: var/lib/PackageKit/transactions.db]
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.38-8.42-generic 2.6.38.2
Uname: Linux 2.6.38-8-generic i586
ApportVersion: 1.22.1-0ubuntu2
Architecture: i386
Date: Mon Sep 12 09:11:53 2011
ProcEnviron:
 LANGUAGE=fi_FI:fi:en_US:en
 PATH=(custom, user)
 LANG=fi_FI.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
SourcePackage: packagekit
UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to oneiric on 2009-02-07 (946 days ago)

Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote :
Changed in packagekit (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Matthias Klumpp (ximion) wrote :

hmm... I cannot reproduce this, but I'll take a closer look at it...

Revision history for this message
Matthias Klumpp (ximion) wrote :

I think I know how to fix this! :) Please be patient :P

Changed in packagekit (Ubuntu):
assignee: nobody → Matthias Klumpp (ximion)
status: Confirmed → In Progress
Colin Watson (cjwatson)
Changed in packagekit (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → High
Revision history for this message
Bob Vincent (pillarsdotnet) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Matthias Klumpp (ximion) wrote :

@Bob: Could you please execute "sudo /usr/lib/packagekit/packagekitd --verbose" in a terminal?
I guess that packagekitd will crash, and this is the root of all problems you're experiencing :P
I think it's better to discuss about this issue in a new bug report, because the first one was related to an APT-backend bug, while this one is a GLib problem.

Revision history for this message
Bob Vincent (pillarsdotnet) wrote :
Download full text (4.7 KiB)

Sure. Console log follows:

root@bowie:~# /usr/lib/packagekit/packagekitd --verbose
00:27:27 PackageKit Verbose debugging enabled (on console 1)
/usr/lib/packagekit/packagekitd: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/packagekit/packagekitd: undefined symbol: g_unix_signal_add_watch_full

A google search of the error finds this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=736880

Here's the output of "apt-get install" showing the urls and version numbers involved:

root@bowie:~# apt-get install kpackagekit packagekit-backend-aptcc
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
  libdebconf-kde0 libpackagekit-glib2-14 libpackagekit-qt14 packagekit
  python-packagekit update-manager-kde
Suggested packages:
  packagekit-backend-apt packagekit-backend-smart
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  kpackagekit libdebconf-kde0 libpackagekit-glib2-14 libpackagekit-qt14 packagekit
  packagekit-backend-aptcc python-packagekit update-manager-kde
0 upgraded, 8 newly installed, 0 to remove and 98 not upgraded.
Need to get 1,639 kB of archives.
After this operation, 6,472 kB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]?
Get:1 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ oneiric/main libdebconf-kde0 i386 0.1+git20110702-1 [33.7 kB]
Get:2 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ natty/main libpackagekit-qt14 i386 0.6.11-2ubuntu3 [105 kB]
Get:3 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ oneiric/main update-manager-kde all 1:0.152.17 [5,264 B]
Get:4 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ oneiric/universe libpackagekit-glib2-14 i386 0.6.15-1build1 [113 kB]
Get:5 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ oneiric/universe python-packagekit all 0.6.15-1build1 [32.6 kB]
Get:6 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ oneiric/universe packagekit-backend-aptcc i386 0.6.15-1build1 [112 kB]
Get:7 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ oneiric/universe packagekit i386 0.6.15-1build1 [752 kB]
Get:8 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ natty/main kpackagekit i386 0.6.3.3-0ubuntu2 [486 kB]
Fetched 1,639 kB in 10s (153 kB/s)
Selecting previously deselected package libdebconf-kde0.
(Reading database ... 579438 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking libdebconf-kde0 (from .../libdebconf-kde0_0.1+git20110702-1_i386.deb) ...
Selecting previously deselected package libpackagekit-qt14.
Unpacking libpackagekit-qt14 (from .../libpackagekit-qt14_0.6.11-2ubuntu3_i386.deb) ...
Selecting previously deselected package update-manager-kde.
Unpacking update-manager-kde (from .../update-manager-kde_1%3a0.152.17_all.deb) ...
Selecting previously deselected package libpackagekit-glib2-14.
Unpacking libpackagekit-glib2-14 (from .../libpackagekit-glib2-14_0.6.15-1build1_i386.deb) ...
Selecting previously deselected package python-packagekit.
Unpacking python-packagekit (from .../python-packagekit_0.6.15-1build1_all.deb) ...
Selecting previously deselected package packagekit-backend-aptcc.
Unpacking packagekit-backend-aptcc (from .../packagekit-backend-aptcc_0.6.15-1build1_i386.deb) ...
Selecting previously deselected package ...

Read more...

Revision history for this message
Bob Vincent (pillarsdotnet) wrote :

After cloning from git://anonscm.debian.org/pkg-packagekit/packagekit.git and installing build prerequisites, compilation fails as follows:

  CC packagekitd-pk-main.o
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -pthread -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/gio-unix-2.0/ -pthread -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/glib-2.0/include -pthread -I/usr/include/dbus-1.0 -I/usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/dbus-1.0/include -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/glib-2.0/include -pthread -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/polkit-1 -I/usr/include/NetworkManager -DPACKAGE_LOCALE_DIR=\"/usr/share/locale\" -DBINDIR=\"/usr/bin\" -DSBINDIR=\"/usr/sbin\" -DDATADIR=\"/usr/share\" -DPREFIX=\""/usr"\" -DSYSCONFDIR=\""/etc"\" -DLIBDIR=\""/usr/lib"\" -DLIBEXECDIR=\""/usr/lib/packagekit"\" -DVERSION="\"0.6.18\"" -DPK_DATA=\"/usr/share/PackageKit\" -DLOCALSTATEDIR=\""/var"\" -DPK_DB_DIR=\""/var/lib/PackageKit"\" -DTESTDATADIR=\""../data/tests"\" -DPK_COMPILATION -DPOLKIT_LOCAL_I_KNOW_API_IS_SUBJECT_TO_CHANGE -DG_LOG_DOMAIN=\"PackageKit\" -I../lib -Werror -Wall -Wcast-align -Wno-uninitialized -Wmissing-declarations -Wpointer-arith -Wcast-align -Wwrite-strings -Winit-self -Wreturn-type -Wformat-nonliteral -Wformat-security -Wmissing-include-dirs -Wmissing-format-attribute -Wsign-compare -Wuninitialized -Waggregate-return -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wshadow -Wno-strict-aliasing -Winline -g -O2 -c -o packagekitd-pk-main.o `test -f 'pk-main.c' || echo './'`pk-main.c
pk-main.c: In function ‘main’:
pk-main.c:276:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘g_unix_signal_add_watch_full’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors

make[4]: *** [packagekitd-pk-main.o] Error 1
make[4]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/packagekit/packagekit/src'
make[3]: *** [all] Error 2
make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/packagekit/packagekit/src'
make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/packagekit/packagekit'
make[1]: *** [all] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/packagekit/packagekit'
dh_auto_build: make -j1 returned exit code 2
make: *** [binary] Error 2
debuild: fatal error at line 1324:
couldn't exec debian/rules:

Revision history for this message
Chris Coulson (chrisccoulson) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote :

Are there newer Build-Depends available to match this change?

Revision history for this message
Matthias Klumpp (ximion) wrote :

Thank you, you confirmed what I already guessed!
This means this bug is fixed soon.
About the Debian package: The package is working fine, you're just building it wrong. You can use "git-buildpackage" [1] to create the package from sources.

The required bugfix is already in Debian, it just needs to be synced with Ubuntu, which will happen if I get a FFe for that. Please see bug #849011 for details.

[1]: http://honk.sigxcpu.org/projects/git-buildpackage/manual-html/gbp.building.html

Revision history for this message
Bob Vincent (pillarsdotnet) wrote :

-- About the Debian package: The package is working fine, you're just building it wrong. You can use "git-buildpackage" [1] to create the package from sources.

Is there a bug report filed against debuild to make it say "use git-buildpackage instead" if it detects a .git directory in the build root?

Revision history for this message
Bob Vincent (pillarsdotnet) wrote :

Alternatively, the same part of "apt-get" that advises cloning the git repository could mention using git-buildpackage as well.

Revision history for this message
Matthias Klumpp (ximion) wrote :

Not all projects using Git are also using git-buildpackage... But there is a way to determine if git-buildpackage should be used, so maybe mentioning it in an info message should be possible.

Revision history for this message
Bob Vincent (pillarsdotnet) wrote :

Building with git-buildpackage fails as follows:

Now signing changes and any dsc files...
 signfile packagekit_0.6.18-1.dsc Matthias Klumpp <email address hidden>
gpg: skipped "Matthias Klumpp <email address hidden>": secret key not available
gpg: /tmp/debsign.jsP1g7uE/packagekit_0.6.18-1.dsc: clearsign failed: secret key not available
debsign: gpg error occurred! Aborting....
debuild: fatal error at line 1269:
running debsign failed
gbp:error: debuild -i -I returned 29
gbp:error: Couldn't run 'debuild -i -I'

Revision history for this message
Matthias Klumpp (ximion) wrote :

You don't have my signature to sign the resulting files - but you should have working deb-packages now.
If you want a working PK *right now*, you can install the Debian packages or just try my PackageKit & Listaller Testing PPA: https://launchpad.net/~ximion/+archive/packagekit/+packages

Revision history for this message
Bob Vincent (pillarsdotnet) wrote :

After creating a ~/.devscripts file (another detail missing from your recommended tutorial) that sets DEBSIGN_MAINT and DEBSIGN_KEYID to my email address and key id respectively, the git-buildpackage tool ran to completion.

-- "If you want a working PK *right now*,"

Well, of course I will switch to the official package once it is working, but yes, I would like my broken system fixed as soon as possible, and I'm willing to do some work to make it happen. I thought that would have been obvious from my level of participation so far.

I can testify that after the following steps, I can now purge and install a package without getting the originally-reported error:

* git clone git://anonscm.debian.org/pkg-packagekit/packagekit.git
* sudo apt-get build-dep packagekit
* sudo apt-get install git-buildpackage
* echo '<email address hidden>' > ~/.devscripts
* echo 'DEBSIGN_KEYID=02811FE8' >> ~/.devscripts
* cd packagekit
* git-buildpackage
* cd ../build-area
* sudo dpkg -i *.deb
* sudo apt-get install smartpm-core python-smartpm

Hopefully this will fix a possibly related problem. See https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=281650

Revision history for this message
Bob Vincent (pillarsdotnet) wrote :

-- "there is a way to determine if git-buildpackage should be used"

Do you mind sharing that information? Or is it Top Tecret / For Official Maintainer Use Only?

Revision history for this message
Matthias Klumpp (ximion) wrote :

Please note that the testing PPA will always contain the newest PackageKit Debian package (even if it is an unstable version) - so take care if you use it.
The problem has already been fixed, the very last step is to get it uploaded to Ubuntu, where I don't have the rights to do this. So we just need to wait.

The way to detect if git-buildpackage should be used is only heuristic. Someone could check for a "gpb.conf" file in "debian/" (which does not have to be there) or check if branches "upstream" and "pristine-tar" are present.
But usually Debian maintainers can figure out how to build a package from a Git source - usually it's git-buildpackage.
I don't see that much need to make this process super-duper-user-friendly, as it's very technical and requires some knowledge by design. But you can ask the debuild maintainers to include an hint to use gbp. Or you maybe can improve the documents.

I don't know if the KDE bug is related, we'll see. Thanks for confirming that this bug here is fixed with the new PK release which will be synced with Oneiric!

Btw: You might want to remove the Smart package manager and PackageKit's Smart backend which you installed with your commands above ;-)

Cheers,
   Matthias

Revision history for this message
Bob Vincent (pillarsdotnet) wrote :

-- "Btw: You might want to remove the Smart package manager and PackageKit's Smart backend which you installed with your commands above ;-)"

So if they should not be installed, why are they "suggested" ?

Revision history for this message
Matthias Klumpp (ximion) wrote : Re: [Bug 847591] Re: Error org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.Spawn.ChildExited: Launch helper exited with unknown return code 127

The additional backend does not do anything bad, it just uses some
disk-space.
The additional backend provides support for SMART and extends PK's
functionality, is therefore suggested, at least for people who use SMART
instead of APT.

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:03:18 -0000, Bob Vincent <email address hidden>
wrote:
> -- "Btw: You might want to remove the Smart package manager and
> PackageKit's Smart backend which you installed with your commands above
> ;-)"
>
> So if they should not be installed, why are they "suggested" ?

Changed in packagekit (Ubuntu Oneiric):
status: In Progress → Fix Committed
Revision history for this message
Bob Vincent (pillarsdotnet) wrote :

> But there is a way to determine if git-buildpackage should be used,
> so maybe mentioning it in an info message should
> be possible.

Do you mind providing a pointer as to where the bug-report / patch-fix
should be filed?

> I don't know if the KDE bug is related, we'll see.

Apparently it isn't; sigh. I really hate seeing a "Reboot is needed" icon
every time I log in. Reminds me too much of Windows.

> The additional backend does not do anything bad, it just uses some
> disk-space.

I've got plenty of disk space.

Revision history for this message
Bob Vincent (pillarsdotnet) wrote :

> Do you mind providing a pointer as to where the bug-report / patch-fix
> should be filed?

Never mind. Filed:
    https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/849423

Revision history for this message
Khairul Aizat Kamarudzzaman (fenris) wrote :

fix committed .. when expected to be release ...

Matthias Klumpp (ximion)
Changed in packagekit (Ubuntu Oneiric):
status: Fix Committed → Fix Released
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.