Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Bdscan 7.90 Crashes On Ubuntu 10.04 X64
mbu
post Jan 7 2012, 08:55 PM
Post #1


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 7-January 12
Member No.: 86,458



Hello guys,

still a "happy new year" from me but unfortunately a problem i cannot solve without your help:

I am using

CODE
BitDefender Antivirus Scanner for Unices v7.90123 Linux-amd64
Copyright (C) 1996-2009 BitDefender. All rights reserved.


on an Ubuntu x64 system.

Please check the output of uname- mr

CODE
2.6.32-37-generic x86_64


When i start a scan, no matter if via bdscan or using the GUI, i run into a crash. Using the GUI, i see something like

CODE
Loading the Antivirus Engines, please wait


before BD crashes.

Using the shell, i get the following:

CODE
XX@YY:/# bdscan home
Copyright (C) 1996-2009 BitDefender. All rights reserved.
Trial key found. 30 days remaining.
Infected file action: ignore
Suspected file action: ignore
Loading plugins, please wait \ Speicherzugriffsfehler


"Speicherzugriffsfehler" means "memory access error", but is a synonym to segmentation fault, i guess?

I installed BD from the ppa (deb http://download.bitdefender.com/repos/deb/ bitdefender non-free), using this site: http://wiki.ubuntuusers.de/bitdefender.


I hope that you can help me.

Sorry for some unusual English, for I live in Germany (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)


Greets,
mbu


Annex:

I did the ulimit -c unlimited - thing and attach the core - dump in megaupload, when it's finished (~50 MB and a 15Kb - upload (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif) )

This post has been edited by mbu: Jan 7 2012, 09:02 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mbu
post Jan 7 2012, 09:29 PM
Post #2


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 7-January 12
Member No.: 86,458



The core- dump is located here:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=NS7G9CNV
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Catalin Salgau
post Jan 8 2012, 01:55 AM
Post #3


Virus Researcher
***

Group: Bitdefender Labs
Posts: 630
Joined: 3-July 08
From: Iasi, Romania
Member No.: 14,578



Thank you for taking the time to report this problem.
I have been able to track down the issue, however I am unable to provide you with a solution at the moment.
I'll post back when I can do so.

Note: 'gzip core' dump would have saved you 3/4 of the upload time.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Catalin Salgau
post Jan 8 2012, 11:47 AM
Post #4


Virus Researcher
***

Group: Bitdefender Labs
Posts: 630
Joined: 3-July 08
From: Iasi, Romania
Member No.: 14,578



A colleague pointed this out. There is a workaround for this problem and it has been provided on the forums before.
For your specific case it amounts to
CODE
touch /opt/BitDefender-scanner/var/lib/scan/bdcore.so.linux-x86_64
ln -fs /opt/BitDefender-scanner/var/lib/scan/bdcore.so.linux-x86_64 /opt/BitDefender-scanner/var/lib/scan/bdcore.so
bdscan --update

I trust this will work in your situation as well.
Reason for edit: fixed second line
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mbu
post Jan 8 2012, 02:28 PM
Post #5


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 7-January 12
Member No.: 86,458



Wow,

thanks first of all for this very fast answer!

I did it the way I was told:

CODE
root@mbpclx:/# touch /opt/BitDefender-scanner/var/lib/scan/bdcore.so.linux-x86_64
root@mbpclx:/#
root@mbpclx:/# ln -fs /opt/BitDefender-scanner/var/lib/scan/bdcore.so /opt/BitDefender-scanner/var/lib/scan/bdcore.so.linux-x86_64


CODE
root@mbpclx:/# bdscan --update
BitDefender Antivirus Scanner for Unices v7.90123 Linux-amd64
Copyright (C) 1996-2009 BitDefender. All rights reserved.
Trial key found. 29 days remaining.

emalware.471 ...... updated
emalware.471  updated
emalware.467 ..... updated
emalware.467  updated
emalware.472 .. updated
emalware.472  updated
emalware.474 .. updated
emalware.474  updated
emalware.479 .. updated
emalware.479  updated
emalware.473 .. updated
emalware.473  updated
jpeg.xmd ..... updated
jpeg.xmd  updated
emalware.469 ....... updated
emalware.469  updated
emalware.470 ...... updated
emalware.470  updated
emalware.480 ..... updated
emalware.480  updated
variant.c01 ...... updated
variant.c01  updated
emalware.478 . updated
emalware.478  updated
emalware.477 . updated
emalware.477  updated
emalware.475 . updated
emalware.475  updated
emalware.483 ....... updated
emalware.483  updated
emalware.476 . updated
emalware.476  updated
emalware.468 ..... updated
emalware.468  updated
emalware.481 ..... updated
emalware.481  updated
e_spyw.i08  updated
e_spyw.i08  updated
emalware.482 ....... updated
emalware.482  updated
update.txt  updated
engines.cvd . updated
bdcore.so.linux-x86_64 ............. updated
Update succeeded.


But it didn't work (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)

CODE
root@mbpclx:/# bdgui
Speicherzugriffsfehler
root@mbpclx:/#


I tried to create a new core-dump, but I wasn't able:

CODE
root@mbpclx:/# ulimit -c unlimited
root@mbpclx:/# ulimit
unlimited
root@mbpclx:/# bdgui
Speicherzugriffsfehler
root@mbpclx:/# ulimit -c unlimited
root@mbpclx:/# bdgui
Speicherzugriffsfehler
root@mbpclx:/#



Besides, I will use gzip next time... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Catalin Salgau
post Jan 8 2012, 04:35 PM
Post #6


Virus Researcher
***

Group: Bitdefender Labs
Posts: 630
Joined: 3-July 08
From: Iasi, Romania
Member No.: 14,578



Terribly sorry for that. I wrote it here by hand.
The second line was supposed to read
CODE
ln -fs /opt/BitDefender-scanner/var/lib/scan/bdcore.so.linux-x86_64 /opt/BitDefender-scanner/var/lib/scan/bdcore.so

I've fixed it in the previous post as well. Just run this one and you should be able to use both bdscan and bdgui properly.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mbu
post Jan 12 2012, 02:15 PM
Post #7


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 7-January 12
Member No.: 86,458



Sorry for delay, been away.

Tried as you wrote, great thing! Everything works fine (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Looks good:
CODE
root@mbpclx:/# bdscan /home
BitDefender Antivirus Scanner for Unices v7.90123 Linux-amd64
Copyright (C) 1996-2009 BitDefender. All rights reserved.
Trial key found. 25 days remaining.

Infected file action: ignore
Suspected file action: ignore
Loading plugins, please wait  
Plugins loaded.

/home/mb/testdisk.log  ok


Great, real great support, guys!! Thanks to you, Catalin, in special!

Best wishes (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rkwesk
post Feb 26 2012, 04:12 PM
Post #8


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 26-February 12
Member No.: 96,062



Hello All

I also have installed BitDefender Antivirus Scanner for Unices v7.90123 Linux-amd64 in Lubuntu 11.10 64bit. I then did an update of the scanner. I also get the

Infected file action: ignore
Suspected file action: ignore
Loading plugins, please wait / Σφάλμα κατάτμησης (segmentation fault)

When I cd to /opt/BitDefender-scanner/var/lib/scan as root and do ls I only see

00000000.tmp bdcore.so versions.dat.512A26895407AEF4F2964BE772AF939A
avxdisk.dll bdupd.so versions.id.512A26895407AEF4F2964BE772AF939A
bdcore.dll Plugins versions.sig.512A26895407AEF4F2964BE772AF939A

This means that

ln -fs /opt/BitDefender-scanner/var/lib/scan/bdcore.so.linux-x86_64 /opt/BitDefender-scanner/var/lib/scan/bdcore.so

would not work as there is no file named bdcore.so.linux-x86_64

Has something changed that I am not aware of?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andionescu
post Feb 27 2012, 06:04 AM
Post #9


Regular Poster
**

Group: Technical Support
Posts: 274
Joined: 24-August 11
Member No.: 71,793



Hi Rkwesk,

I will reply later with an answer for your post.

Regards,

Andi
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rkwesk
post Feb 29 2012, 09:33 AM
Post #10


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 26-February 12
Member No.: 96,062



QUOTE (andionescu @ Feb 27 2012, 07:04 AM) *
Hi Rkwesk,

I will reply later with an answer for your post.

Regards,

Andi


Thank you, Andi. I await news from your end.

rkwesk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andionescu
post Feb 29 2012, 09:44 AM
Post #11


Regular Poster
**

Group: Technical Support
Posts: 274
Joined: 24-August 11
Member No.: 71,793



Hi Rkwesk,

Please follow the steps from the link below:

http://unices.bitdefender.com/2011/11/01/b...ner-for-unices/

Regards,

Andi
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rkwesk
post Mar 1 2012, 06:21 PM
Post #12


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 26-February 12
Member No.: 96,062



QUOTE (andionescu @ Feb 29 2012, 10:44 AM) *
Hi Rkwesk,

Please follow the steps from the link below:

http://unices.bitdefender.com/2011/11/01/b...ner-for-unices/

Regards,

Andi


Hi Andi

I do appreciate your effort in answering my predicament. I have stated that like our friend, Edgar Duarte, quoted below, I, too, am running a 64 bit version of linux. Edgar claims that the fix works for 32bit systems but not for 64 bit.

Please know that some of us have first become aware of your company's product from the very favourable review written in the periodical Linux Format (United Kingdom) and will be happy to report back to the journal that indeed the Bitdefender support team have continued to work on and improve this fine product. Even if ultimately the fix for 64 bit comes only later on, I am already persuaded to write to this journal of your efforts to help.

If you could look into this further, I and others running 64bit systems will be very pleased. Meanwhile I will check back here to read further news.

rkwesk
=============================================================
From
http://unices.bitdefender.com/2011/11/01/b...ner-for-unices/

Edgar Duarte wrote on February 10th, 2012 | 6:54 am

I run the script on my 64 box and still same error, seems what comes in the update is 32 while the installation is 64, really is just badly written.
I’m removing and purging.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rkwesk
post Mar 1 2012, 10:08 PM
Post #13


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 26-February 12
Member No.: 96,062



QUOTE (rkwesk @ Mar 1 2012, 07:21 PM) *
Hi Andi

I do appreciate your effort in answering my predicament. I have stated that like our friend, Edgar Duarte, quoted below, I, too, am running a 64 bit version of linux. Edgar claims that the fix works for 32bit systems but not for 64 bit.

snip

rkwesk


I hasten to post again now that I have indeed worked through the commands that Dan Pușlenghea posted. Although some who commented after his post made errors, among whom Edgar Duarte, it seems that an empty file was created with the name bdcore.so.linux-x86_64 (in my case as I am running a 64 bit system) and then a symbolic link was created which points to bdcore.so.linux-x86_64 replacing the non-empty file bdcore.so which was renamed bdcore.so.old so yes, I owe you, Andi, an apology in posting before investigating the advice you forwarded.

I am trying to understand why the advice is working so I may pass it forward in Greek to my local community and in English to the Linux Format community. It seems that bdcore.so acts like a flag. The flag says linux-x86_64 (in my case) and so the program does not seg fault.

Do I have that right? Again, I thank you, Andi and the team. This thread (in my opinion) should be marked as "solved."

rkwesk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andionescu
post Mar 22 2012, 11:18 AM
Post #14


Regular Poster
**

Group: Technical Support
Posts: 274
Joined: 24-August 11
Member No.: 71,793



Hi Rkwesk,
Sorry for the late reply.

The empty file is created to bring the latest version(the fixed one) of bdcore.so from the BitDefender update server to the local machine.

Regards,

Andi

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th April 2014 - 05:51 AM