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

Bug#321718: Upgrade caused many libs to complain about "executable stack"

On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 08:59:17PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:

> This modification was done because mprotect returned EFAULT instead of
> ENOMEM, that was simply POSIX violation.  The actual problem is linux
> kernel 2.4.  But in order to work glibc 2.3.5 on etch, we need to fix
> adhoc patch to change dl-execstack.c.  I don't know it's acceptable
> for upstream, but it's worth fixing.  If it'll be rejected, this patch
> should be marked as "until-etch" if etch does not support any 2.4
> kernel hopefully.  Now the patch that I have not tested yet.  Is this
> solution desired for the next 2.3.5-4?

Etch certainly won't support 2.4.18 officially; that will be an
oldstable-1 kernel at the time etch releases.  Is it really worth trying
to maintain compatibility with that kernel?

AIUI, glibc 2.3.5 is currently compatible with the sarge and etch 2.4
kernels.  That seems sufficient to me; why not just mark glibc in the
preinst as being incompatible with old 2.4 kernels?

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: