[Spacewalk-list] SEVERE: Can't find free port 8009 8019
Jan Hutař
jhutar at redhat.com
Mon Jul 9 07:33:58 UTC 2012
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 17:27:23 -0300 Nilton Moura
<redhat at nmoura.eti.br> wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> On Spacewalk 1.6 startup process, the tomcat log shows that
> tomcat6 tries to bind from 8009 to 8019 ports, but it can't.
>
> Jul 2, 2012 5:02:15 PM org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket init
> INFO: Port busy 8009 java.net.BindException: Address already
> in use Jul 2, 2012 5:02:15 PM
> org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket init INFO: Port busy 8010
> java.net.BindException: Address already in use Jul 2, 2012
> 5:02:15 PM org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket init INFO: Port
> busy 8011 java.net.BindException: Address already in use Jul
> 2, 2012 5:02:15 PM org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket init
> INFO: Port busy 8012 java.net.BindException: Address already
> in use Jul 2, 2012 5:02:15 PM
> org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket init INFO: Port busy 8013
> java.net.BindException: Address already in use Jul 2, 2012
> 5:02:15 PM org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket init INFO: Port
> busy 8014 java.net.BindException: Address already in use Jul
> 2, 2012 5:02:15 PM org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket init
> INFO: Port busy 8015 java.net.BindException: Address already
> in use Jul 2, 2012 5:02:15 PM
> org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket init INFO: Port busy 8016
> java.net.BindException: Address already in use Jul 2, 2012
> 5:02:15 PM org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket init INFO: Port
> busy 8017 java.net.BindException: Address already in use Jul
> 2, 2012 5:02:15 PM org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket init
> INFO: Port busy 8018 java.net.BindException: Address already
> in use Jul 2, 2012 5:02:15 PM
> org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket init INFO: Port busy 8019
> java.net.BindException: Address already in use Jul 2, 2012
> 5:02:15 PM org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket init SEVERE:
> Can't find free port 8009 8019 Jul 2, 2012 5:02:15 PM
> org.apache.jk.server.JkMain start INFO: Jk running ID=0
> time=1/10 config=null Jul 2, 2012 5:02:16 PM
> org.apache.catalina.startup.Catalina start INFO: Server
> startup in 32926 ms
>
> But these ports are already binded (ipv6):
>
> $ sudo netstat -ntlp|grep :80..
> tcp 0 0 ::1:8011 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8011 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::1:8012 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8012 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::1:8013 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8013 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::1:8014 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8014 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::1:8015 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8015 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::1:8016 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8016 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8080 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 :::80 :::*
> LISTEN 1750/httpd
> tcp 0 0 ::1:8017 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8017 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::1:8018 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8018 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::1:8019 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8019 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8005 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::1:8009 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8009 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::1:8010 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
> tcp 0 0 ::ffff:127.0.0.1:8010 :::*
> LISTEN 1672/java
>
> Does anybody knows if this is because it tries to bind on ipv4
> address too? Should I disable ipv6 support on my OS?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Nilton.
Is this causing some functionality problems, or is it just error
log message (probably important though)?
What is that java pid 1672 process? Is it tomcat as well?
Regards,
Jan
--
Jan Hutar Systems Management QA
jhutar at redhat.com Red Hat, Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/spacewalk-list/attachments/20120709/c227b666/attachment.sig>
More information about the Spacewalk-list
mailing list