Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
'emerge sync' not working; sudden rsync hostname problems?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Portage & Programming
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
CJayNC
n00b
n00b


Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 11
Location: Lexington, SC

PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:17 pm    Post subject: 'emerge sync' not working; sudden rsync hostname problems? Reply with quote

Hi All,

I've been using Gentoo (I love it! :D) since the end of January, and every few days I re-sync and check for updated packages. 'emerge sync' has always worked for me, until last night.

I've found a fix, but I'd really like to understand what suddenly changed to cause rsync to stop working.

running 'emerge sync' as root now results in the following errors:

Code:

>>> starting rsync with rsync://rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage...
rsync: getaddrinfo: rsync.gentoo.org 873: No address associated with hostname
rsync error: error in socket IO (code 10) at clientserver.c(83)
>>> Starting retry 1 of 3
rsync: getaddrinfo: rsync.gentoo.org 873: No address associated with hostname
rsync error: error in socket IO (code 10) at clientserver.c(83)
>>> Starting retry 2 of 3
rsync: getaddrinfo: rsync.gentoo.org 873: No address associated with hostname
rsync error: error in socket IO (code 10) at clientserver.c(83)
>>> Starting retry 3 of 3
rsync: getaddrinfo: rsync.gentoo.org 873: No address associated with hostname
rsync error: error in socket IO (code 10) at clientserver.c(83)


if I do a 'host rsync.gentoo.org' I get the following:

Code:

;; Truncated, retrying in TCP mode.
;; Connection to 192.168.254.254#53(192.168.254.254) for rsync.gentoo.org failed: connection refused.


I'm connected to the internet via DSL, and I'm behind a router (hence the 192.x.x.x address above). I'm not having difficulties getting to any other http, ftp, or telnet sites. So far, it's only rsync that isn't working.

The fix I've done, as noted in other posts, is to update /etc/resolve.conf to use a different nameserver (e.g., my ISP's nameserver). Then the 'emerge sync' works as expected.

But what changed (apparently yesterday?) to cause me to have to do this, when I've been running the other way successfully for over a month? I sync'ed succesfully Friday evening. I'm using portage-2.0.47-r8.

My router configuration hasn't (knowingly) changed either.

I appreciate any enlightenment you can share!

Thanks,
CJ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Accipiter
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 24 Feb 2003
Posts: 82
Location: Buffalo, NY

PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:44 pm    Post subject: Not the Only One Reply with quote

I can corroborate this. I'm having the same problem with rsync://rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage . So I did some googling, and what little explanation there is can be found in errcode.h:

Code:
define RERR_OK          0
define RERR_SYNTAX      1      /* syntax or usage error */
define RERR_PROTOCOL    2      /* protocol incompatibility */
define RERR_FILESELECT  3      /* errors selecting input/output files, dirs */
define RERR_UNSUPPORTED 4      /* requested action not supported */
define RERR_STARTCLIENT 5      /* error starting client-server protocol */
define RERR_SOCKETIO   10      /* error in socket IO */
define RERR_FILEIO     11      /* error in file IO */
define RERR_STREAMIO   12      /* error in rsync protocol data stream */
define RERR_MESSAGEIO  13      /* errors with program diagnostics */
define RERR_IPC        14      /* error in IPC code */
define RERR_SIGNAL     20      /* status returned when sent SIGUSR1, SIGINT */
define RERR_WAITCHILD  21      /* some error returned by waitpid() */
define RERR_MALLOC     22      /* error allocating core memory buffers */
define RERR_PARTIAL    23      /* partial transfer */
define RERR_TIMEOUT    30      /* timeout in data send/receive */

...Which leads me to only be able to say the problem is likely not clientside. When a server refuses a connection, it's actively turning away packets; the equivalent of saying "I hear you, but I'm not running this service." But if I attempt to ping or nmap it, I never get past my local nameserver. So it's THESE servers refusing the packets. Not good. As it turns out, rsync.gentoo.org appears to have dropped off the face of the earth.
_________________
unzip ; strip ; touch ; finger ; mount ; fsck ; more ; yes ; umount ; sleep
Registered Linux user #307220, machine #192830
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CJayNC
n00b
n00b


Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 11
Location: Lexington, SC

PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2003 3:34 pm    Post subject: Re: Not the Only One Reply with quote

Accipiter wrote:

...Which leads me to only be able to say the problem is likely not clientside. When a server refuses a connection, it's actively turning away packets; the equivalent of saying "I hear you, but I'm not running this service." But if I attempt to ping or nmap it, I never get past my local nameserver. So it's THESE servers refusing the packets. Not good. As it turns out, rsync.gentoo.org appears to have dropped off the face of the earth.


It may look that way, but it hasn't. As I said, if I use a nameserver beyond my router, rsync.gentoo.org is there and will happily sync my box. So the server is there and functioning properly, I just can't get to it anymore when my router tries to resolve the name.

I'm confused... :?

To me it looks like something on my side isn't configured properly any more. I doubt its hardware since others appear to be having the same problem. Has some type of portage/emerge/rsync configuration recently changed? Perhaps I picked up that change Friday night when I updated, thereby causing the failures starting Saturday? It's all conjecture at this point...

Thanks,
CJ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nukes
n00b
n00b


Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 13
Location: Scotland, UK

PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2003 6:13 pm    Post subject: Me too!! Reply with quote

I'm having this problem also. I tried to do an emerge synce and it won't resolve. I went to a Windows box in the next room (connecting through the same gateway/dns) and pinged rsync.gentoo.org, wrote down the IP and went back to my box.
I added this into /etc/hosts with rsync.gentoo.org and this did absolutley nothing. My portage tree is broke as well so I can't install the software I nedd (I'm new to gentoo and have just spent this weekend downloading piles of stuff for it to get it up to scratch)
It was working up until a few hours ago so I can' see what would be causing it.
I will try and find an open DNS server outside my LAN and see if that works.
_________________
_____
NuKeS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dup2
n00b
n00b


Joined: 19 Apr 2002
Posts: 14
Location: lost in space

PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2003 7:19 pm    Post subject: DNS problem (at least with me) Reply with quote

Got the same problem just 10 minutes ago - for me it was a DNS issue as contacting another DNS server (and setting it in /etc/resolv.conf) worked.

If you need some IP-addresses then here is an output from running
host rsync.gentoo.org 212.40.0.10

which is a query against a swiss nameserver (ns1.tiscali.ch)


rsync.gentoo.org has address 141.71.54.40

rsync.gentoo.org has address 141.225.37.221
rsync.gentoo.org has address 168.187.5.244
rsync.gentoo.org has address 194.97.4.250
rsync.gentoo.org has address 195.149.39.120
rsync.gentoo.org has address 203.16.234.31
rsync.gentoo.org has address 203.16.234.32
rsync.gentoo.org has address 204.89.193.10
rsync.gentoo.org has address 206.169.166.57
rsync.gentoo.org has address 208.41.22.116
rsync.gentoo.org has address 209.213.0.163
rsync.gentoo.org has address 212.224.22.34
rsync.gentoo.org has address 219.111.13.142
rsync.gentoo.org has address 62.138.61.2
rsync.gentoo.org has address 62.146.82.66
rsync.gentoo.org has address 62.146.82.67
rsync.gentoo.org has address 62.146.82.68
rsync.gentoo.org has address 62.146.82.69
rsync.gentoo.org has address 62.146.82.70
rsync.gentoo.org has address 80.239.42.138
rsync.gentoo.org has address 128.227.212.225
rsync.gentoo.org has address 130.89.175.34
rsync.gentoo.org has address 130.207.108.134
rsync.gentoo.org has address 130.225.247.90
rsync.gentoo.org has address 132.229.67.201
rsync.gentoo.org has address 134.147.32.57
rsync.gentoo.org has address 137.226.116.99
rsync.gentoo.org has address 140.105.134.1


You may temporary set this nameserver in /etc/resolv.conf to get the lookup for the rsync right. Be warned - the provider (tiscali) ist NOT GOING TO LIKE THIS!. You better choose another working DNS server
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Roguelazer
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 1233
Location: San Francisco, CA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 2:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmmm.. This may be a related problem, and I want to know what is wrong. Today I went to emerge sync and was unable to connect to the site. Now, unfortunately, every time I emerge sync it just sits there saying
Code:
>>> starting rsync with rsync://rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage...
for many minutes. Is there any way to rsync with another server and NOT go through some swiss dns server?

PS: This is on a cable connection in the USA...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Roguelazer
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 1233
Location: San Francisco, CA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 2:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh, silly me. I forgot to put the real point of my post, which is the code printed after the 10 minutes or so has elapsed.
Code:
>>> starting rsync with rsync://rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage...
rsync: getaddrinfo: rsync.gentoo.org 873: No address associated with hostname
rsync error: error in socket IO (code 10) at clientserver.c(83)
>> Starting retry 1 of 3


Sorry if I'm wrong, but clientserver.c looks clientside.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
perry
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 18 Nov 2002
Posts: 142
Location: Cornfields of Indiana

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 3:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Having the same problem on my system.

Code:

localhost root # emerge sync
>>> starting rsync with rsync://rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage...
rsync: getaddrinfo: rsync.gentoo.org 873: No address associated with hostname
rsync error: error in socket IO (code 10) at clientserver.c(83)
>>> Starting retry 1 of 3
rsync: getaddrinfo: rsync.gentoo.org 873: No address associated with hostname
rsync error: error in socket IO (code 10) at clientserver.c(83)
>>> Starting retry 2 of 3
rsync error: received SIGUSR1 or SIGINT (code 20) at rsync.c(229)
Killed
localhost root # host rsync.gentoo.org
;; Truncated, retrying in TCP mode.
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached


Guessing its just a temporary server problem, nothing wrong with my/our systems. I'm on Comcast cable in Indiana...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dark*staR
n00b
n00b


Joined: 29 Nov 2002
Posts: 21

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 4:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am also having exactly the same problems

>>> starting rsync with rsync://rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage...
rsync: getaddrinfo: rsync.gentoo.org 873: No address associated with hostname
rsync error: error in socket IO (code 10) at clientserver.c(83)
>>> Starting retry 1 of 3
_________________
------------
Dark*staR
------------
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dl1vr8r
n00b
n00b


Joined: 07 Mar 2003
Posts: 39
Location: SLC

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 6:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'll jump in with a "me too". It's been doing this for a at least a couple of hours (as of 23:30 MST)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
plate
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 1663
Location: Berlin

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 7:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As a temporary fix for those who don't like waiting it out, you can add a line to /etc/make.conf:
Code:
SYNC="rsync://rsync.jp.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage"
Replace "jp" with the ISO two-letter country code of your choice. Don't forget to change back later.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chris Finch
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 10 Mar 2003
Posts: 106
Location: Darmstadt, Germany

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 10:29 am    Post subject: it worked Reply with quote

thanks for the (temporary) fix,

cheers,

Finchy

ps: curious what was the actual problem.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
patan
n00b
n00b


Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 66

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 12:03 pm    Post subject: Lookup problems Reply with quote

I think the problem is partly due to the success of Gentoo. :)

The round robin respons to the dns query to rsync.gentoo.org has grown too much. DNS uses udp 53 for queries and tcp 53 for zone-transfers, but if the response to a query is to big DNS switches to tcp for that query.

The limit is 512 bytes for a DNS udp packet (counting the overhead of the udp header).

So I think the solution to the problem would be to enable tcp/53 (if it's blocked in a firewall or at your dns server) or to shrink the round robin answer to a dns query for rsync.gentoo.org.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
svyatogor
Retired Dev
Retired Dev


Joined: 13 Feb 2003
Posts: 186
Location: Kingdom of Kells

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I seem to have the same problem. I am also behind a router with 192.x.x.x net addresses, but I've always been using by ISP DNS. For the last few days I was unable to emerge rsync (same as other error messages in the thread). Changing rsync.gentoo.org to rsync.uk.gentoo.org did help, but I'm just wondering what's wrong with Gentoo's rsync?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Accipiter
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 24 Feb 2003
Posts: 82
Location: Buffalo, NY

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 12:40 pm    Post subject: Something changed. Reply with quote

See... this worked before. I happen to be behind a router (and using my ISP's default nameservers, which in and of itself is probably a mistake... long story), as well, but this never stopped me until just yesterday. With the quickfix outlined by the previous poster (I'm using rsync.us.gentoo.org), I've been able to run "emerge sync" successfully.

However, I am very curious. What has happened between then and now which makes these circumstances even arise? I read our friend patan's post... but there are those of us who would like to read this in plain English :wink:
_________________
unzip ; strip ; touch ; finger ; mount ; fsck ; more ; yes ; umount ; sleep
Registered Linux user #307220, machine #192830
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DaFire
n00b
n00b


Joined: 07 Nov 2002
Posts: 25

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had same problem yesterday.. using a different dns server solved the problem for me

dafire
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
axxackall
l33t
l33t


Joined: 06 Nov 2002
Posts: 651
Location: Toronto, Ontario, 3rd Rock From Sun

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 1:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

is it possible to change the rsync mirror automatically in a way similar to what mirrorselect does for distfiles' mirrors? Actually, I wonder if anyone tried to modify the mirrorselect script already. If so - then please publish it here. If not yet, than I'll try it myself.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
klieber
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 17 Apr 2002
Posts: 3657
Location: San Francisco, CA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 1:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Folks --

the problem and solution are both described by patan here. This is not a gentoo issue -- it's a DNS issue. The solution is to open TCP/53 on your firewalls.

We are *temporarily* cutting back the number of rsync mirrors to *temporarily* alleviate the problem. However, this is a *temporary* solution. :) At some point, our continued growth is going to demand that we put those rsync mirrors back in the rotation.

If we can find another fix, we will, but at this point, the problem is a client-side one, not a server-side one.

--kurt
_________________
The problem with political jokes is that they get elected
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
morck
n00b
n00b


Joined: 25 Sep 2002
Posts: 60
Location: Moers, Germany

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

The solution is to open TCP/53 on your firewalls.

and what if it is already open???
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
klieber
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 17 Apr 2002
Posts: 3657
Location: San Francisco, CA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 8:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

morck wrote:

and what if it is already open???

then you have a different problem.

--kurt
_________________
The problem with political jokes is that they get elected
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
axxackall
l33t
l33t


Joined: 06 Nov 2002
Posts: 651
Location: Toronto, Ontario, 3rd Rock From Sun

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 8:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

klieber wrote:
morck wrote:

and what if it is already open???

then you have a different problem.


What if many of us around a globe have a differnet problems?

Admit, rsync server admins screwed up their DNS setup. Period. And don't bounce users to look at thier "client" side, when there is nothing to fix on their side.

Unfriendly "guru" answers in support forums is one of reasons why many people are running away from BSD and from other Linux distros to Gentoo. Do you want to turn them back?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
klieber
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 17 Apr 2002
Posts: 3657
Location: San Francisco, CA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 9:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

axxackall wrote:
Admit, rsync server admins screwed up their DNS setup. Period. And don't bounce users to look at thier "client" side, when there is nothing to fix on their side.

If you want to point fingers, point them at me. I'm the "rsync server admins" that added the rsync servers to the rrset and caused the UDP packet to spill over into TCP-land. If you want to call that a screw up, fine. Go ahead. However, the "problem" lies with the UDP packet size and the fact that, once it reaches a certain size, it won't work and has to use TCP instead. So anyone that blocks TCP/53 won't be able to resolve rsync.gentoo.org.

The simple fact remains that most DNS servers I try return the results expected. For example, try the following:

Code:
dig @ns3.earthlink.net rsync.gentoo.org


from a computer that isn't blocked by a firewall and it will work fine. If it doesn't, then it's a client-side issue. If you feel it's still a server side issue, then please send me the diagnostics to support it and I'll be happy to discuss it with you.

--kurt
_________________
The problem with political jokes is that they get elected
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
klieber
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 17 Apr 2002
Posts: 3657
Location: San Francisco, CA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just as a follow up, if your ISP (or whatever network that hosts your DNS servers) are blocking outbound port 53, then this would also likely cause the same problem. Again, it's out of our control, however.

As I said before, we've temporarily reduced the number of rsync servers in the rrset. For obvious reasons (lack of scalability) this isn't a permanent solution.

--kurt
_________________
The problem with political jokes is that they get elected
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
klieber
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 17 Apr 2002
Posts: 3657
Location: San Francisco, CA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

plate wrote:
As a temporary fix for those who don't like waiting it out, you can add a line to /etc/make.conf:
Code:
SYNC="rsync://rsync.jp.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage"
Replace "jp" with the ISO two-letter country code of your choice. Don't forget to change back later.

This is likely to be much more than a temporary fix. We created those country-code domains for a reason -- use them. :)

At the moment, outside of rsync.us.gentoo.org, Germany has the most mirrors in their country rrset. The UK has one, .dk, .nl and .no have one or two each and Iceland and Hungary each have one. Oh yeah -- and Italy has a pretty fast one as well.

We're also working on adding continent-based rrsets, so things like rsync.eu.gentoo.org and rsync.na.gentoo.org will work as well.

--kurt
_________________
The problem with political jokes is that they get elected
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aja
l33t
l33t


Joined: 26 Aug 2002
Posts: 705
Location: Edmonton, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 9:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gotta say I go with klieber on this one. Using a round-robin DNS resolution is entirely appropriate given the kind of load we are growing into, as is adding new servers. Because of this, the RFC spec calls for the large DNS returns to fall over into TCP.

IT IS NOT INAPPROPRIATE TO EXPECT AN INTERNET FIREWALL TO HAVE TCP 53 OPEN - Failing to have it open is, indeed, a client-side problem (even, if in the past, it hasn't waved its ugly head).

If Net Admins or users don't want to have it open (as is their right), then there are other options, such as emerge-webrsync.

And Klieber was quite correct to say that people who are experiencing rsync problems that have that port open must be having a different problem (which should be described so it can be addressed).

Finally, I think that hot-trigger flame posts to fairly reasonable (if somewhat terse) support responses are at least as responsible for people moving away from lists as perhaps over-burdened gurus being somewhat short when a thread persists after the solution has been posted.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Portage & Programming All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum