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

Re: Bug#312936: Programmes linked against libacl1 segfault in libacl1 code.

On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 11:58:02AM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > Do you know if upgrading to the 2.4 kernel version available in sarge makes
> > a difference here? 

> Anything specific you're looking for there Steve?


  + arm: upgrade doesn't work with 2.2, but can work with 2.4.24 or above.
    (perhaps also with older versions, currently unknown)
    (details: glibc vs kernel, source: kylem, tested on netwinder)


AFAIK, this was the only discussion of minimum kernel versions for sarge
on ARM prior to release; it's very possible that either a glibc change or a
toolchain change has resulted in the current ARM libacl binaries being
usable only on later kernels than what was available in woody, due to
differing ABIs.  We had a hard time finding people to test this upgrade
path, because there are apparently relatively few machines that are
compatible with the ARM kernels that shipped in woody. :/

> I know the ACL kernel patches fairly well, and nothing has changed for
> years now so I'd be surprised if a kernel upgrade changed anything.

On the contrary, libacl works sanely on kernels lacking any ACL kernel
support whatsoever -- this architecture-specific failure more likely points
to a kernel ABI issue specific to ARM.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: