Debian Bug report logs - #890873
lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 07:48:31 +0100

Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.74
Severity: important

Seen twice on lindsay.d.o in the last 24 hours.  The exact reason is
unknown, but it is probably during the unpacker (last non-error in the
log is lintian starting the unpack, plus previously we had a race-condition
in the unpacker that could trigger a similar fork-bomp situation).

Most likely we never fixed this condition and only made it
"sufficiently unlikely" until gcc-8-cross-ports showed up.


For now, I have disabled the crontab on lindsay.d.o to avoid it taking
down our host.

Thanks,
~Niels

Message #10 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>

To: 890873@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#890873: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 07:19:00 +0000

Niels Thykier:
> Package: lintian
> Version: 2.5.74
> Severity: important
> 
> Seen twice on lindsay.d.o in the last 24 hours.  The exact reason is
> unknown, but it is probably during the unpacker (last non-error in the
> log is lintian starting the unpack, plus previously we had a race-condition
> in the unpacker that could trigger a similar fork-bomp situation).
> 
> Most likely we never fixed this condition and only made it
> "sufficiently unlikely" until gcc-8-cross-ports showed up.
> 
> 
> For now, I have disabled the crontab on lindsay.d.o to avoid it taking
> down our host.
> 
> Thanks,
> ~Niels
> 

Btw, I got an old prototype rewrite where the custom parallelization
handling is replaced by IO::Async in
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/users/nthykier/lintian.git/log/?h=unpacker-io-async

No clue if this handles this particular problem, but I wanted to
mentioned it in case someone else got the same idea of rewriting things
to use IO::Async.

Thanks,
~Niels

Message #15 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Olly Betts <olly@survex.com>

To: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>, 890873@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#890873: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 12:30:57 +1300

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 07:48:31AM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Seen twice on lindsay.d.o in the last 24 hours.  The exact reason is
> unknown, but it is probably during the unpacker (last non-error in the
> log is lintian starting the unpack, plus previously we had a race-condition
> in the unpacker that could trigger a similar fork-bomp situation).
> 
> Most likely we never fixed this condition and only made it
> "sufficiently unlikely" until gcc-8-cross-ports showed up.
> 
> For now, I have disabled the crontab on lindsay.d.o to avoid it taking
> down our host.

I tried to build the wxwidgets3.0 3.0.4+dfsg-1 in an unstable chroot a
couple of days ago.  I use sbuild and it's configured to run lintian in
the chroot on the built packages.  However lintian ran out of disk space
in the chroot, which isn't something I have hit before.  And I would
expect the build itself to need more disk space than lintian (assuming
that the debian/rules clean target is run before lintian is).  Lintian
appeared to be slowly failing on each binary package in turn, so I just
hit Ctrl-C on it.

I asked on #debian-devel in case this was a known problem, and lamby
pointed out this ticket and suggested adding a note in case this is the
same underlying issue, so I'm doing so.  I didn't attempt to investigate
further yet.

Cheers,
    Olly

Message #20 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>

To: Olly Betts <olly@survex.com>, 890873@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#890873: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 07:10:00 +0000

Olly Betts:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 07:48:31AM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
>> Seen twice on lindsay.d.o in the last 24 hours.  The exact reason is
>> unknown, but it is probably during the unpacker (last non-error in the
>> log is lintian starting the unpack, plus previously we had a race-condition
>> in the unpacker that could trigger a similar fork-bomp situation).
>>
>> Most likely we never fixed this condition and only made it
>> "sufficiently unlikely" until gcc-8-cross-ports showed up.
>>
>> For now, I have disabled the crontab on lindsay.d.o to avoid it taking
>> down our host.
> 
> I tried to build the wxwidgets3.0 3.0.4+dfsg-1 in an unstable chroot a
> couple of days ago.  I use sbuild and it's configured to run lintian in
> the chroot on the built packages.  However lintian ran out of disk space
> in the chroot, which isn't something I have hit before.  And I would
> expect the build itself to need more disk space than lintian (assuming
> that the debian/rules clean target is run before lintian is).  Lintian
> appeared to be slowly failing on each binary package in turn, so I just
> hit Ctrl-C on it.
> 
> I asked on #debian-devel in case this was a known problem, and lamby
> pointed out this ticket and suggested adding a note in case this is the
> same underlying issue, so I'm doing so.  I didn't attempt to investigate
> further yet.
> 
> Cheers,
>     Olly
> 

Hi Olly,

Can you check if you end up with 10+ lintian processes when you
experience the "out of disk"-issue?

If possible, can you also try lintian with the [io-async branch] to see
if that fixes your issue?  Note: It will require libio-async-perl to be
available when lintian runs (in case you do ad-hoc patching of the
installed lintian).

Thanks,
~Niels

[io-async branch]:
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/users/nthykier/lintian.git/log/?h=unpacker-io-async

Message #25 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>

To: 890873@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2018 11:29:09 +0100

Hi,

From #debian-qa:

  <lamby> Can we not blacklist gcc-8-cross-ports fornow re. #890873?  Whilst
  ugly, I think it would be better for lintian reports to be more up-to-date.
  
  <nthykier> we could try my patch after getting DSA to install the new
  dependencies
  
  <nthykier> that is what I would recommend; but I am not working on lintian
  atm., so I am happy to leave the decision to you
  
  <lamby> Cool. Well, unfortunately your unpacker-io-async branch is outside of
  my Perl competency to review alas. So I would not have any idea how to fix it
  if it broke :)
  
  <lamby> Not /quite/ sure how I'd even blacklist, mind you. The test harness has
  always kinda worked before :)
  
  <nthykier> blacklist?
  
  <lamby> As in, keep HEAD as it is, simply skip gcc-8-cross-ports so at least we
  are processing the rest of the archive.
  
  <nthykier> ah, blacklist in the harness. We never had a need for that so the
  code does not exist but it is probably doable to implement
  
  <nthykier> Basically, if find_backlog (L::Util) does not return the package, it
  will never be processed
  
  <nthykier> so we need some control for blacklisting packages (e.g. the config
  file) and propogate it to find_backlog.  This could be sync-state that sets a
  "blacklisted: true" flag and find_backlog that looks for it
  
  <nthykier> and then, we probably want to show which packages have been
  blacklisted in the generated reports (but that is an independent step)
  
  <lamby> At this point I think even a hacky list of exceptions in the code would
  be preferable to being so behind. :(  (unsure how the config file foo works,
  alas)
  
  <nthykier> The config is just a YAML file - in perl we work with it as a
  hashref at the root level and then whatever structure we expect beneath that
  
  <lamby> /srv/lintian.debian.org/config.yaml ?
  
  <nthykier> yes. so something like: for my $dist
  (@{$CONFIG->{'archives'}{'debian-debug'}{'distributions'}}) { ... }"
  
  <nthykier> http://paste.debian.net/1019095/  From $GIT/reporting/config.yaml
  (which is an example)
  
  <nthykier> I think /srv/lintian.debian.org/config.yaml also have debian-debug
  (that is how we find the -dbgsym packages


Regards,

-- 
      ,''`.
     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
     `. `'`      lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
       `-

Message #30 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>

To: 890873@bugs.debian.org, Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>

Subject: Re: Bug#890873: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2018 12:48:35 +0100

Chris Lamb wrote:

>   <lamby> Can we not blacklist gcc-8-cross-ports fornow re. #890873?
[…]
>   <lamby> At this point I think even a hacky list of exceptions in the 
>   code would be preferable to being so behind.

My first stab at a patch for blacklisting in the meantime:

  https://gist.github.com/lamby/20bd2c85f77a501fdc7a6db058b06ff4/raw

  
Regards,

-- 
      ,''`.
     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
     `. `'`      lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
       `-

Message #35 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>

To: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>, 890873@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#890873: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2018 12:07:00 +0000

Chris Lamb:
> Chris Lamb wrote:
> 
>>   <lamby> Can we not blacklist gcc-8-cross-ports fornow re. #890873?
> […]
>>   <lamby> At this point I think even a hacky list of exceptions in the 
>>   code would be preferable to being so behind.
> 
> My first stab at a patch for blacklisting in the meantime:
> 
>   https://gist.github.com/lamby/20bd2c85f77a501fdc7a6db058b06ff4/raw
> 
>   
> Regards,
> 

Thanks for having a look at this.

I have one design concern; I think the blacklist should be global and
not per archive. Note that lintian merges packages across archives into
a single group (i.e. it takes the source and binaries from one archive
and merges it with the binaries from the other archive to support dbgsym
processing).
  From that perspective, a per-archive blacklist seems rather awkward
because it is not immediately clear what it means to blacklist a source
in one archive if it happens to exist in another archive as well.  Not
to mention, you would still see gcc-8-cross-ports being processed (but
now we would only process the dbgsym packages).


If you change the config handling to make the blacklist was "global"
(i.e. apply to all archives), then every thing will probably "just
work(tm)".

Nits:
=====

On the more minor side of things, I would have liked to see lintian
still record the packages that are blacklisted (and mark them as such in
the reports).  E.g. to catch now obsolete backlists.  However that can
certainly appear later.

We will probably want to map the blacklist into a hashref so we can do
O(1) testing to see if a source is blacklisted if the blacklist grows
more than a handful of packages.  I hope it is unnecessary, but noted in
case you find "return if exists($blacklist->{$src});" more readable than
"return if grep { $src eq $_ } @{$blacklist};".

Thanks,
~Niels

Message #40 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>

To: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>, 890873@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#890873: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2018 18:11:51 +0100

Hi Niels,

> Thanks for having a look at this.

Thanks for the review. I've updated my patch here:

  https://gist.githubusercontent.com/lamby/996d85ac0e6ba0a18af2758e79912299/raw

> I have one design concern; I think the blacklist should be global
> not per archive.

ACK, updated.

> On the more minor side of things, I would have liked to see lintian
> still record the packages that are blacklisted.

In lieu of marking them as such on the reports, I've made it spit out log
messages when it skips something. (For the offending packages, it will at
least still show "processed with Lintian $very_old_version" so it should
not be /too/ magic.)


> We will probably want to map the blacklist into a hashref so we can do
> O(1) testing to see if a source is blacklisted if the blacklist grows
> more than a handful of packages.

I hope this is unnecessary too (!), but I'm a bit stubborn so have
implemented it regardless.

Looking forward to your feedback... :)


Best wishes,

-- 
      ,''`.
     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
     `. `'`      lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
       `-

Message #45 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>

To: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>, 890873@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#890873: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2018 17:41:00 +0000

Chris Lamb:
> Hi Niels,
> 
>> Thanks for having a look at this.
> 
> Thanks for the review. I've updated my patch here:
> 
>   https://gist.githubusercontent.com/lamby/996d85ac0e6ba0a18af2758e79912299/raw
> 
>> I have one design concern; I think the blacklist should be global
>> not per archive.
> 
> ACK, updated.
> 
>> On the more minor side of things, I would have liked to see lintian
>> still record the packages that are blacklisted.
> 
> In lieu of marking them as such on the reports, I've made it spit out log
> messages when it skips something. (For the offending packages, it will at
> least still show "processed with Lintian $very_old_version" so it should
> not be /too/ magic.)
> 
> 
>> We will probably want to map the blacklist into a hashref so we can do
>> O(1) testing to see if a source is blacklisted if the blacklist grows
>> more than a handful of packages.
> 
> I hope this is unnecessary too (!), but I'm a bit stubborn so have
> implemented it regardless.
> 
> Looking forward to your feedback... :)
> 
> 
> Best wishes,
> 

Thanks, looks good to me with a quick review.

I think we should try that variant and see what breaks. :)  Honestly, I
do not remember if you can use $foo->{'bar'} in a string interpolation,
but I guess are about to find out. :)

Thanks,
~Niels

Message #50 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>

To: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>, 890873@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#890873: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2018 19:17:08 +0100

Hi Niels,

> I do not remember if you can use $foo->{'bar'} in a string
> interpolation, but I guess are about to find out. :)

  $ cat test.pl
  use strict;
  my $foo = { 'bar' => 'Yes.' };
  print "Can we use \$foo->{'bar'} in a string interpolation? $foo->{'bar'}\n";

  $ perl test.pl
  Can we use $foo->{'bar'} in a string interpolation? Yes.

TIL :)

> Thanks, looks good to me with a quick review.

I'll give it a whirl!
 

Best wishes,

-- 
      ,''`.
     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
     `. `'`      lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
       `-

Message #55 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>

To: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>, 890873@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#890873: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2018 18:40:00 +0000

Chris Lamb:
> Hi Niels,
> 
>> I do not remember if you can use $foo->{'bar'} in a string
>> interpolation, but I guess are about to find out. :)
> 
>   $ cat test.pl
>   use strict;
>   my $foo = { 'bar' => 'Yes.' };
>   print "Can we use \$foo->{'bar'} in a string interpolation? $foo->{'bar'}\n";
> 
>   $ perl test.pl
>   Can we use $foo->{'bar'} in a string interpolation? Yes.
> 
> TIL :)
> 

TIWR :)

>> Thanks, looks good to me with a quick review.
> 
> I'll give it a whirl!
>  
> 
> Best wishes,
> 

Looking forward to seeing updated results on lintian.debian.org. :)

Thanks,
~Niels

Message #60 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>

To: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>, 890873@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#890873: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2018 06:20:00 +0000

Niels Thykier:
> Chris Lamb:
>> Hi Niels,
>>
> [...]
>>> Thanks, looks good to me with a quick review.
>>
>> I'll give it a whirl!
>>  
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
> 
> Looking forward to seeing updated results on lintian.debian.org. :)
> 
> Thanks,
> ~Niels
> 

Hi,

I had a look in the logs and it is not clear to me that the blacklist is
working.  Looking for gcc-8-cross-ports I get the following:

> $ grep  gcc-8-cross-ports /srv/lintian.debian.org/logs/sync_state.log*
> /srv/lintian.debian.org/logs/sync_state.log.0:gcc-8-cross-ports/6 is out-of-date: New group (triggered by binary:cpp-8-alpha-linux-gnu/8-20180402-1cross2/i386)
> /srv/lintian.debian.org/logs/sync_state.log.0:Group gcc-8-cross-ports/2 dropped: It is not an active group

Looking for "blacklisted" (which should appear in the log if something
is blacked listed), I get nothing:

> $ grep -r blacklisted /srv/lintian.debian.org/logs
> $

I would have expected to at least see:

> Ignoring blacklisted package src:gcc-8-cross-ports

Thanks,
~Niels

Message #65 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>

To: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>, 890873@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#890873: lintian: gcc-8-cross-ports makes lintian fork-bomb, consume all memory and fill the disk

Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 11:00:33 +0100

Hi Niels,

> I had a look in the logs and it is not clear to me that the blacklist is
> working

  --- /srv/lindsay.debian.org/config.yaml 2018-04-09 09:57:18.859643045 +0000
  +++ /srv/lindsay.debian.org/config.yaml 2018-04-09 09:57:58.336325579 +0000
  @@ -68,4 +68,4 @@
     LINTIAN_SOURCE: https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git
   
   blacklist:
  -  - gcc-8-cross-ports (#890873)
  +  - gcc-8-cross-ports # (#890873)
  

 "I believe that has some significance for our problem."

                                            — Richard Feynman


Best wishes,

-- 
      ,''`.
     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
     `. `'`      lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
       `-

Message #70 received at 890873-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@lease-up.com>

To: 890873-done@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>, Olly Betts <olly@survex.com>

Subject: Issue no longer present

Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2020 18:32:53 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

Recent versions of Lintian complete peacefully for gcc-9-cross-ports
and gcc-10-cross-ports. There are no fork bombs or other issues. Log
files for both are attached.

The runs merely take time, presumably because the packages are large
and complex. They also require plenty of space in /tmp (approximately
50 GB for gcc-10-cross-ports running locally).

$ ls -al /mirror/debian/pool/main/g/gcc-10-cross-ports/ | grep -v ^d | wc -l
557
$ du -sh /mirror/debian/pool/main/g/gcc-10-cross-ports/
8.6G    /mirror/debian/pool/main/g/gcc-10-cross-ports/

$ ls -al /mirror/debian/pool/main/g/gcc-9-cross-ports/ | grep -v ^d | wc -l
495
$ du -sh /mirror/debian/pool/main/g/gcc-9-cross-ports/
2.0G    /mirror/debian/pool/main/g/gcc-9-cross-ports/

The exam subject from the original filing, gcc-8-cross-ports, was no
longer available in unstable. An effort was made to obtain the sources
and installation packages for all supported architectures. It likewise
completed peacefully. That log is also attached.

$ ls -al ../bugs/gcc-8-cross-ports/ | grep -v ^d | wc -l
569
$ du -sh ../bugs/gcc-8-cross-ports/
1.9G    ../bugs/gcc-8-cross-ports/

Not sure if Olly's problem with wxwidgets3.0 was related, but it ran
fine. That log is attached as well.

The reported issue is no longer present. Closing this bug.

Kind regards
Felix Lechner

[gcc-10-cross-ports.log.xz (application/x-xz, attachment)]

[gcc-9-cross-ports.log.xz (application/x-xz, attachment)]

[gcc-8-cross-ports.log.xz (application/x-xz, attachment)]

[wxwidgets3.0.log.xz (application/x-xz, attachment)]

Message #75 received at 890873@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Olly Betts <olly@survex.com>

To: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@lease-up.com>

Cc: 890873@bugs.debian.org, Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>

Subject: Re: Issue no longer present

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 03:45:55 +0100

On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 06:32:53PM -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
> Not sure if Olly's problem with wxwidgets3.0 was related, but it ran
> fine. That log is attached as well.

I suspect it wasn't, but I think I didn't get a chance to investigate as
it didn't recur.

Cheers,
    Olly

Message #76 received at 890873-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>

To: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@lease-up.com>, 890873-done@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Olly Betts <olly@survex.com>

Subject: Re: Issue no longer present

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 18:37:01 +0200

Felix Lechner:
> Hi,
> 
> Recent versions of Lintian complete peacefully for gcc-9-cross-ports
> and gcc-10-cross-ports. There are no fork bombs or other issues. Log
> files for both are attached.
> 
> The runs merely take time, presumably because the packages are large
> and complex. They also require plenty of space in /tmp (approximately
> 50 GB for gcc-10-cross-ports running locally).
> 
> [...]
> 
> Not sure if Olly's problem with wxwidgets3.0 was related, but it ran
> fine. That log is attached as well.
> 
> The reported issue is no longer present. Closing this bug.
> 
> Kind regards
> Felix Lechner
> 

Hi Felix,

Good to hear the problem is solved.

Though if lintian uses 50GB of disk space to process these packages,
then lindsay.d.o probably needs more disk space.  At the moment, there
is a total of 32GB for all lintian's needs on lindsay (including the
reports, caches and scratch space).

$ df -h /srv/lintian.debian.org/scratch/
Filesystem                  Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/mapper/vg_lindsay-srv   32G  6.6G   23G  23% /srv


(just as a FYI)

~Niels

Message #77 received at 890873-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>

To: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@lease-up.com>, 890873-done@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Olly Betts <olly@survex.com>

Subject: Re: Issue no longer present

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 18:40:11 +0200

Niels Thykier:
> Felix Lechner:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Recent versions of Lintian complete peacefully for gcc-9-cross-ports
>> and gcc-10-cross-ports. There are no fork bombs or other issues. Log
>> files for both are attached.
>>
>> The runs merely take time, presumably because the packages are large
>> and complex. They also require plenty of space in /tmp (approximately
>> 50 GB for gcc-10-cross-ports running locally).
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Not sure if Olly's problem with wxwidgets3.0 was related, but it ran
>> fine. That log is attached as well.
>>
>> The reported issue is no longer present. Closing this bug.
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Felix Lechner
>>
> 
> Hi Felix,
> 
> Good to hear the problem is solved.
> 
> Though if lintian uses 50GB of disk space to process these packages,
> then lindsay.d.o probably needs more disk space.  At the moment, there
> is a total of 32GB for all lintian's needs on lindsay (including the
> reports, caches and scratch space).
> 
> $ df -h /srv/lintian.debian.org/scratch/
> Filesystem                  Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/mapper/vg_lindsay-srv   32G  6.6G   23G  23% /srv
> 
> 
> (just as a FYI)
> 
> ~Niels
> 

Ah, you already reported this in another email.  Apologies for the noise. :)

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.