Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2021 04:46:36 UTC
In message <72A5E40F-C973-473C-B2A4-ACDD28685FD8@yahoo.com>, Mark Millard write s: > Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert_at_cschubert.com> wrote on: > Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2021 14:02:06 -0700 : > > > Can you provide me with a backtrace, using the bt command, please. > > > That was in the original message from David W. A copy was > in the reply that you sent to the list as well: > > > > (gdb) bt > > > #0 0x00000000010fb34f in wpa_sm_rx_eapol () > > > #1 0x00000000010f3afe in l2_packet_receive () > > > #2 0x0000000001122ef3 in eloop_run () > > > #3 0x00000000010b44a8 in wpa_supplicant_run () > > > #4 0x000000000109fdec in main () > > But it also had this report about the context: > > > > (No debugging symbols found in /usr/obj/usr/src/amd64.amd64/usr.sbin/wpa/ > wp= > > > a_supplicant/wpa_supplicant) > > > So it was apparently a non-debug build without symbols, limiting > the information that is available. Correct. We have debug symbols now and are chasing it down. I suspect a static function address in a structure may be incorrect. -- Cheers, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> FreeBSD UNIX: <cy@FreeBSD.org> Web: https://FreeBSD.org NTP: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Web: https://nwtime.org The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few.