Re: glibc, X11 and the rest
Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 1999 at 12:22:02AM +0200, Christian Meder wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > finally I caught up with normal life again; maybe slightly more noisy
> > than before ;-)
> Good to hear from you again :)
> > It's ok that the old sparc patches were dropped because they were
> > just compatibility hacks for the 2.0.x kernels. Potato will be pure
> > 2.2.x on Sparc. But I'm slightly worried about the upgrade path. If we
> > really depend on a kernel > 2.2.7 we'll need a glibc preinst script on
> > Sparc which bails out on older kernels (uname). Ben, do you know
> > what's the init problem ? Maybe we can fix it instead ?
> Yes, the only thing we have is a glibc 2.1pre compatibility patch for
> the chown@GLIBC2.1 symbol, new compiles will completely ignore this. As
> far as the kernel 2.2.7 issue, it's only pertinent to sun4m and I think
> sun4d (confirmation?). I have already setup a preinst addition that
> checks /proc/cpuinfo for this and then checks for uname -r and compares
> the version. It fails if requirements are not met.
> We did try a vfork patch, but it reportedly did not work. We have not
> seen any other patches that might fix this, but since I am not even
> close to uploading glibc 2.1.1 into the archive, we still have time to
> test, and I'm willing to try. Recompiling init does not work, btw.
IIRC, somewhere in sysdep tree leading up to sparc32, there is a
vfork.c that defines vfork to call fork. If you put this in the
sparc32 directory and apply the NR_vfork patch for pipe() (or whatever
that vfork patch was for), then the problems might go away.
If I find time tomorrow (err, friday), I'll download your glibc source
and take a look.
Steve
dunham@cse.msu.edu
Reply to: