99665 - tstclnt, cmsutil seg. violation in backward compatibility tests

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(NSS :: Tools, defect, P1)

Description

[Sonja Mirtitsch]

I have not investigated this thouroughly, but file a bug because for a while we
will not build the tip.

Windows 2000 (nssqa-win2k) passed debug and failed OPt only, sonjaNT failed both
Failures look the same on both systems, failures on 95 and NT build looked the
same or at least very similar

ssl.sh: SSL tests ===============================
ssl.sh: SSL Cipher Coverage ===============================
selfserv -p 8443 -d ../server -n nssqa-win2k.red.iplanet.com \
         -w nss -c ABCDEFabcdefghijklm -i ../tests_pid.1388  &
selfserv started at Fri Sep 14 04:25:30 PDT 2001
tstclnt -p 8443 -h nssqa-win2k -q -d . <
W:/nss/nss322/builds/20010820.1/blowfish_NT4.0_Win95/mozilla/security/nss/tests/ssl/sslreq.txt

[2] + Done(139) ?
  1100	Segmentation violation	tstclnt
RETRY: tstclnt -p 8443 -h nssqa-win2k -q -d . <
W:/nss/nss322/builds/20010820.1/blowfish_NT4.0_Win95/mozilla/security/nss/tests/ssl/sslreq.txt
[2] + Done(139) ?
  1376	Segmentation violation	tstclnt

smime.sh: S/MIME Tests ===============================
smime.sh: Signing Attached Message ------------------------------
cmsutil -S -N Alice -i alice.txt -d ../alicedir -p nss -o alice.sig
[1] + Done(139) ?
  410	Segmentation violation	cmsutil
smime.sh: Create Signature Alice . FAILED
cmsutil -D -i alice.sig -d ../bobdir -o alice.data1
[1] + Done(139) ?
  452	Segmentation violation	cmsutil
smime.sh: Decode Alice's Signature . FAILED
diff alice.txt alice.data1
1,6d0
< Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:00:01 -0700 (PDT)
< From: [e-mail]
< Subject: message Alice --> Bob
< To: [e-mail]
< < This is a test message from Alice to Bob.
smime.sh: Compare Decoded Signature and Original . FAILED

Comment 1

[Sonja Mirtitsch]

Attachment: output.log

Comment 2

[Sonja Mirtitsch]

Attachment: result.html

Comment 3

[Robert Relyea]

I'm presuming the subject should read: Old 'tstclnt' and 'cmsutil' seg violation
on new library. The opposite is not necessarily expected to work.

bob

Comment 4

[Sonja Mirtitsch]

yes, you are right - but since that is the only combination we test in the
backward compatibility tests I did not specify this explicitly

I also noticed that the attachments I put on this bug were wrong, these are the
passed main tests and not the backward compatibility tests, I'll attach the rigt
ones now...

the Path we were using in the failed tests was

w:/nss/nss322/builds/20010820.1/blowfish_NT4.0_Win95/mozilla/dist/WINNT4.0_DBG.OBJ/bin;
w:/nss/nsstip/builds/20010914.1/blowfish_NT4.0_Win95/mozilla/dist/WINNT4.0_DBG.OBJ/lib

Comment 5

[Sonja Mirtitsch]

Attachment: results.html (backward compatibility tests)

Comment 6

[Sonja Mirtitsch]

Attachment: output.log (backward compatibility tests)

Comment 7

[Wan-Teh Chang]

Assigned the bug to Ian.

Comment 8

[Sonja Mirtitsch]

Should I leave the backward compatibility test on now after all? I do not know
if you were still in the meeting Ian when we decided to turn of the backward
compatibility tests because Bob R. will not fix the other issues ( bug #104061 )
any time soon

Comment 9

[Sonja Mirtitsch]

This problem has not been seen in a while