Re: Re: (ARM EABI) ports-20061127 + kernel-headers-2.6.18 %3D%3D broken system

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: (ARM EABI) ports-20061127 + kernel-headers-2.6.18 %3D%3D broken system

s_j_newbury (Bugzilla)
Ive dissassembled both libcs. The most obvious difference is the function is
empty in the broken version. Furthermore it seems I compiled the new libc with
-fomit-frame-pointer, while the previous was was with frame-pointer. Could this
be what triggered the breakage?

--- [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 12:35:52AM +0000, Steven Newbury wrote:
> > OK. Attached is the output of strace -f rm <file> of both the previous
> > glibc+ports20060925 compiled with 2.6.17 headers (I think) and
> > glibc+ports20061127 compiled with 2.6.18 sanitised headers. The prior
works,
> > the latter doesn't.
>
> I have no idea how you've provoked this behavior but you didn't even
> get it to call lstat; I think you'll need to debug into that call to
> find out what's gone wrong.
>
> --
> Daniel Jacobowitz
> CodeSourcery


Steve

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: (ARM EABI) ports-20061127 + kernel-headers-2.6.18 %3D%3D broken system

s_j_newbury (Bugzilla)
Ive dissassembled both libcs. The most obvious difference is the function is
empty in the broken version. Furthermore it seems I compiled the new libc with
-fomit-frame-pointer, while the previous was was with frame-pointer. Could this
be what triggered the breakage?


Steve

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: (ARM EABI) ports-20061127 + kernel-headers-2.6.18 %3D%3D broken system

Daniel Jacobowitz-2
In reply to this post by s_j_newbury (Bugzilla)
On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 01:23:27PM +0000, Steven Newbury wrote:
> Ive dissassembled both libcs. The most obvious difference is the function is
> empty in the broken version. Furthermore it seems I compiled the new libc with
> -fomit-frame-pointer, while the previous was was with frame-pointer. Could this
> be what triggered the breakage?

I don't know, sorry.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery