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

Re: new glibc, egcs, etc.

On Mon, Mar 22, 1999 at 05:42:37PM +0200, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Mar 1999, Hartmut Koptein wrote:
> >Please inform we on which package you will work or any other person on this
> >list. 
> If noone objects I could work on (but I will not be able to upload until the
> situation with my pgp key is resolved):
> strace

As far as basic usage goes, this is fixed.  If you feel up to it, you
can try to track down the "umove: Input/output error" in tracing mmap()
calls.  And if you really feel that courageous, I invite you to look at
ltrace (similar program, traces shared library calls).

Both of those problems require a fairly good understanding of the
powerpc and possibly intel architectures.

> samba

I've got that here somewhere... it wasn't too hard to fix.

The porblem is source/include/includes.h, which undefines and redefines
strcpy and friends.  But strcpy is used by the str*() macros in glibc
2.1.  There's no other good solution but to remove those three
redefinitions entirely, as far as I can see.  Talk to the maintainer or
upstream about that I suppose.

> mesalib 3.0+ggi | these two will hopefully work after we have ggi ported ok.
> svgalib+ggi     |

Hopefully so; moving ggi over is a little convoluted though (I spent a
few days trying to make it use my framebuffer; gave up).

> geomview (I have already fixed this, but it's useless since there is no glibc
> 	  version of libforms, I sent the author a mail but no reply yet).

Good luck.

> PS.2. I thought there was a fixed gmp version that got rid of the bad assembly
> syntax.

Dale will release it in a few days, hopefully.  gmp2 is being
completely redone.


/--------------------------------\  /--------------------------------\
|       Daniel Jacobowitz        |__|     CMU, CS class of 2002      |
|   Debian GNU/Linux Developer    __   Part-Time Systems Programmer  |
|         dan@debian.org         |  |        drow@cs.cmu.edu         |
\--------------------------------/  \--------------------------------/

Reply to: