[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: em86

On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 10:29:59AM -0500, Thomas Evans wrote:
> So, is it just the case that the x86 interpreter needs to be rebuilt 
> with a newer glibc?

Well, without having the source, it's hard to say whether it's "just" the
case that it needs a rebuild :-)  And it looks like I toasted my directory
from the last time I tried to get it working, but according to my outbox,
after getting the public bits of em86 to build from source against glibc
2.3 the binary segfaulted somewhere inside the FX!32 bits.  It may be that a
recompile is all that's needed for this part; who knows?

> While at DEC I had been partially responsible for that component on 
> Linux/Alpha.

> The last round, we tried to make that component open source, without luck.
> I had tried to find out what needed to be done to make it work with newer
> distros - in any case, I might be able to talk to some people to see 
> able about
> getting a newer component built at the very least - just tell me what 
> needs to be done.

If there's actually a chance of this happening, I could re-do the work to
get em86 building with glibc 2.3 and post a patch; then it'd still be up to
someone with access to the FX!32 source to find out why it's segfaulting and
fix that part.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: