---------- Initial header -----------
>From : "Randolph Chung" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To : "John David Anglin" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC :
[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL
PROTECTED],debian-hppa@lists.debian.org,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date : Wed, 10 Aug 2005 22:53:08 +0800
Subject : Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]
> >>Confirmed. We are passing a function pointer with a value of -2 into
> >>__cffc, which should not happen...
> >
> >
> > Is -2 a special signal number?
>
> I don't think so. in any case, others have observed that if they use an
> older glibc, this problem does not happen.
>
> randolph
>
Hello all,
Which kernel was it?
In fact while simply rebuilding a kernel (as root, without fakeroot), I also
observe a segfault with 2.6.8 and 2.6.10 (on c110 and d380) but panicing
2.6.12 (on the same c110 and d380) as well as 2.6.13-rc6 on d380 and b2k.
Fwiw with kernel 2.6.11.12, the rebuild runs fine on this same d380 and b2k.
That's confusing me: is there actualy a pb in libc or do we need some
constraint to install this new libc?
Thanks,
Joel
-------------------------------------------------------
NOTE! My email address is changing to ... @scarlet.be
Please make the necessary changes in your address book.
