segfault in vs 2008 demo

[myk_taylor]

Hi guys,

I seem to be getting a segfault when I run the vs binary.  The application window appears briefly, then some font errors appear, then the application crashes.

To be specific, when ./vs is run, the following lines are output:

Code: [Select]

Fontconfig warning: line 73: unknown element "cachedir"
Fontconfig warning: line 74: unknown element "cachedir"

Then the window appears and the following lines are output (I obfuscated my home directory name):

Code: [Select]

SlickEdit: Missing Unicode font '-mutt-clearlyu-medium-r-normal--17-120-100-100-p-124-iso10646-1'. An alternate font has been substituted.
SlickEdit: Some Unicode text may not be correctly displayed. Please see /home/******/bin/slickedit/unix_unicode_fonts.txt for more information on Unicode fonts.
Segmentation fault (core dumped)

I've tried also running vs_fileonly and vs_sharedxft, but both error out with the message:

Code: [Select]

error while loading shared libraries: libexpat.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

My system is running 64-bit with 32-bit compatibility libraries installed.  My kernel is version 2.6.24.
I have fontconfig 2.5.0 (libfontconfig.so.1.3.0 in 64-bit, libfontconfig.so.1.2.0 in 32-bit)
and expat-2.0.1 (libexpat.so.1.5.2 in both 32- and 64- bit versions).

I have the core dump available if it would help in debugging.

Thanks,
Myk

[hs2]

Kohei just added the missing libexpat.so.0 symlink - see http://community.slickedit.com/index.php?topic=3150.msg12938#msg12938. Maybe this helps also in your case.
HS2

[myk_taylor]

symlinking libexpat.so.0 to libexpat.so.1.5.2 (32-bit version) allowed vs_fileonly to run, but vs_sharedxft core dumps as well.  I saw the messages below were still output:

SlickEdit: Missing Unicode font '-mutt-clearlyu-medium-r-normal--17-120-100-100-p-124-iso10646-1'. An alternate font has been substituted.
SlickEdit: Some Unicode text may not be correctly displayed. Please see /home/myk/bin/slickedit/unix_unicode_fonts.txt for more information on Unicode fonts.
This executable was built without activation support

so for now I'll use vs_fileonly.  I still have the core dumps for vs and vs_sharedxft if they're needed

thanks for the tip

[Ivan N. Zlatev]

They have a typo somewhere in their code I guess. The font on my system is:

-mutt-clearlyu-medium-r-normal--17-120-100-100-p-123-iso10646-1

Note the 123 instead of 124. I used xfontsel to determine this.

[Clark]

Known core dump problem: The only reason SlickEdit ships the "vs_fileonly" executable is to solve a core dump problem with FlexNet.  FlexNet activation support crashes on Ubuntu 64-bit and probably any derivation of Ubuntu.  I haven't seen this problem with any 32-bit Linux yet.

What Linux distrib are you running?

[myk_taylor]

I'm running Gentoo amd64 stable.

Code: [Select]

$ uname -srvmpio  # (this is just uname -a without the hostname)
Linux 2.6.24-gentoo-r3 #2 SMP Tue Mar 18 17:59:03 PDT 2008 x86_64 Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5345 @ 2.33GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux

Is the segfault in vs_sharedxft due to the same issue?

[Clark]

"vs_sharedxft" has activation support so it will crash just like "vs".  vs_fileonly is linked to XFT shared so you don't need to worry about fontconfig issues.  I've been told that the Gentoo source is similar to Ubuntu.  We are also aware that the crash occurs on Gentoo 64-bit.  Hopefully, flexNet will eventually support Ubuntu and Gentoo.  The don't claim any support for either right now.

[myk_taylor]

Ok.  I'll use the vs_fileonly binary for now.   I planned to use file-based registration anyway -- I use SlickEdit in places that can't access the internet sometimes.  I read in another thread that I will have to rename the original vs binary for some functions to work.  Is this correct?

so if I run:

Code: [Select]

$ cd slickedit/bin
$ mv vs vs.orig
$ ln -s /usr/lib32/libexpat.so.1.5.2 libexpat.so.0
$ ln -s vs_fileonly vs
$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. ./vs

will all issues be resolved?

As an aside, why is vs_fileonly linked to both libexpat.so.0 /and/ libexpat.so.1?

[natros]

I made a shell script for running vs_fileonly

Code: [Select]

cat /usr/local/bin/vs
#!/bin/sh

SE_HOME=/opt/slickedit/bin

export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=${LD_LIBRARY_PATH}:${SE_HOME}
${SE_HOME}/vs "$@"


on my gentoo system vs_fileonly is only linked to libexpat.so.0

Code: [Select]

ldd /opt/slickedit/bin/vs_fileonly |grep expat
        libexpat.so.0 => not found

I'm using slickedit on both gentoo and ubuntu but none of them have libexpat.so.0

Code: [Select]

ls -l /usr/lib/libexpat.so*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root     17 2007-08-12 21:33 /usr/lib/libexpat.so -> libexpat.so.1.5.2
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root     17 2007-08-12 21:33 /usr/lib/libexpat.so.1 -> libexpat.so.1.5.2
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 123484 2007-08-12 21:33 /usr/lib/libexpat.so.1.5.2


[Clark]

I shouldn't need you need to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH path.

[myk_taylor]

I was under the impression that I need to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH because the symlink to libexpat.so.0 is in my slickedit/bin directory.  I wouldn't need to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH if I made the symlink in /usr/lib32, but I don't want to mess up the rest of my system.

by the way, here are the linking results on my system:

Code: [Select]

$ echo ${PWD/$HOME/\~}
~/bin/slickedit.13/bin

$ ll | grep expat
lrwxrwxrwx  1 myk users       28 Apr  1 15:36 libexpat.so.0 -> /usr/lib32/libexpat.so.1.5.2

$ ldd vs_fileonly | grep expat
        libexpat.so.0 => not found
        libexpat.so.1 => /usr/lib32/libexpat.so.1 (0x48f02000)

$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. ldd vs_fileonly | grep expat
        libexpat.so.0 => ./libexpat.so.0 (0x48f02000)

you're right, though, natros: only libexpat.so.0 is referenced in the elf header.  Perhaps the linker is automatically falling through to libexpat.so.1 when it can't find .0.

[Clark]

Yes, you're right.  If you made the symlink in the SlickEdit bin directory, then you need to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH.

[chris_d]

Known core dump problem: The only reason SlickEdit ships the "vs_fileonly" executable is to solve a core dump problem with FlexNet.  FlexNet activation support crashes on Ubuntu 64-bit and probably any derivation of Ubuntu.  I haven't seen this problem with any 32-bit Linux yet.

Does this mean the 'Concurrent User License' option is not supported for 64bit Ubunutu machines? I am considering persuading my company to get a licence or two of SlickEdit 2008 and I think they would probably prefer to get concurrent user licences but most of the people in my team run 64bit Ubuntu.

And is there any way I can install the trial version of SlickEdit 2008 on 64bit Ubuntu?

[Clark]

I will look into this to make sure all scenarios work.  There's the server side and the client side.  The client side should work fine because clients should run "vs_fileonly".  VERY soon will will have a file based licensing option on the server side.  However, we may need to ship an additional server side executable which has no activation support.  I will check into this.

[Clark]

Concurrent licensing works for Ubuntu 64-bit and Gentoo 64-bit.  On the client side, you need to use "vs_fileonly".  On the server side, there are couple extra steps (we are working on the instructions) and you need to use file based licensing which will be available very soon.  If your server is not running Ubuntu 64-bit or Gentoo 64-bit, you can use activations on the server side.