Hello community,

here is the log from the commit of package glibc for openSUSE:Factory checked 
in at 2012-05-08 06:45:24
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Comparing /work/SRC/openSUSE:Factory/glibc (Old)
 and      /work/SRC/openSUSE:Factory/.glibc.new (New)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Package is "glibc", Maintainer is "[email protected]"

Changes:
--------
--- /work/SRC/openSUSE:Factory/glibc/glibc.changes      2012-04-23 
16:11:07.000000000 +0200
+++ /work/SRC/openSUSE:Factory/.glibc.new/glibc.changes 2012-05-08 
06:45:29.000000000 +0200
@@ -1,0 +2,20 @@
+Thu May  3 11:05:36 UTC 2012 - [email protected]
+
+- Fix dynamic linker name for ARMv5.
+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------
+Thu Apr 26 14:02:37 UTC 2012 - [email protected]
+
+- Fix mcheck (optimization problem with gcc 4.7)
+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------
+Wed Apr 25 10:40:20 UTC 2012 - [email protected]
+
+- Also check for armv7hl.
+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------
+Wed Apr 25 08:47:22 UTC 2012 - [email protected]
+
+- provide old ld-linux.so.3 on armv7, not catched by find.provides
+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------

New:
----
  glibc-2.16-mcheck.patch

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Other differences:
------------------
++++++ glibc.spec ++++++
--- /var/tmp/diff_new_pack.PkyQQz/_old  2012-05-08 06:45:33.000000000 +0200
+++ /var/tmp/diff_new_pack.PkyQQz/_new  2012-05-08 06:45:33.000000000 +0200
@@ -108,6 +108,11 @@
 %ifarch ppc
 Obsoletes:      glibc-32bit
 %endif
+%ifarch armv7l armv7hl
+# The old runtime linker link gets not provided by rpm find.provides, but it 
exists
+Provides:       ld-linux.so.3
+Provides:       ld-linux.so.3(GLIBC_2.4)
+%endif
 Version:        2.15
 Release:        0
 %define git_id 2ba92745c36e
@@ -292,6 +297,8 @@
 Patch2008:      glibc-ld-profile.patch
 # PATCH-FIX-OPENSUSE _fini does not have proper unwinding information on 
x86_64 bso#11610
 Patch2009:      glibc-fini-unwind.diff
+# PATCH-FIX-OPENSUSE malloc(0);free gets optimized out
+Patch2010:      glibc-2.16-mcheck.patch
 
 %description
 The GNU C Library provides the most important standard libraries used
@@ -541,7 +548,7 @@
 %endif
 
 %patch2001 -p1
-%ifarch armv7l
+%ifarch armv7l armv7hl
 %patch2002 -p1
 %endif
 %patch2003 -p1
@@ -553,6 +560,7 @@
 # XXX Disable, it breaks the testsuite, test elf/tst-audit2 
 # %patch2008 -p1
 %patch2009 -p1
+%patch2010 -p1
 
 #
 # Inconsistency detected by ld.so: dl-close.c: 719: _dl_close: Assertion 
`map->l_init_called' failed!
@@ -1019,7 +1027,7 @@
 install -m 644 %{SOURCE21} %{buildroot}/lib/systemd/system
 install -m 644 %{SOURCE22} %{buildroot}/lib/systemd/system
 
-%ifarch armv7l
+%ifarch armv7l armv7hl
 # Provide compatibility link
 ln -s ld-%{version}.so %{buildroot}/lib/ld-linux.so.3
 %endif
@@ -1099,12 +1107,12 @@
 
 # Each architecture has a different name for the dynamic linker:
 %ifarch %arm
-%ifarch armv7l
+%ifarch armv7l armv7hl
 /%{_lib}/ld-linux-armhf.so.3
 # Keep compatibility link
 /%{_lib}/ld-linux.so.3
 %else
-/%{_lib}/ld-linux.so.2
+/%{_lib}/ld-linux.so.3
 %endif
 %endif
 %ifarch ia64


++++++ glibc-2.16-mcheck.patch ++++++
diff --git a/malloc/mcheck.c b/malloc/mcheck.c
index 9213740..7491c49 100644
--- a/malloc/mcheck.c
+++ b/malloc/mcheck.c
@@ -370,6 +370,12 @@ mabort (enum mcheck_status status)
 #endif
 }
 
+#ifndef malloc_opt_barrier
+#define malloc_opt_barrier(x) \
+({ __typeof (x) __x = x; __asm ("" : "+m" (__x)); __x; })
+#define malloc_force_eval(x) __asm __volatile ("" : : "m" (x))
+#endif
+
 int
 mcheck (func)
      void (*func) (enum mcheck_status);
@@ -381,6 +387,7 @@ mcheck (func)
     {
       /* We call malloc() once here to ensure it is initialized.  */
       void *p = malloc (0);
+      p = malloc_opt_barrier (p);
       free (p);
 
       old_free_hook = __free_hook;
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to