On Sunday 11 December 2005 07:34, Rob Landley wrote:
On Friday 09 December 2005 12:39, Antoine Martin wrote:
Is this glibc? Any ideas?
Yes, I see that on Debian Sarge too. Don't ask me why fsck uses thread,
but it seems to do that.
I wasn't even thinking about that! So true, why
On Friday 09 December 2005 19:39, Antoine Martin wrote:
On Fri, 2005-12-09 at 18:52 +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
On Thursday 08 December 2005 03:13, Antoine Martin wrote:
I'm still trying to get a regular FC4 image to boot with the latest x86
tls support code.
Mainline kernel or with
Also, different glibc are more or less happy in using modify_ldt() rather
than set_thread_area() - it seems that latter is better.
Ahh, is it planned
What?
I was wondering if this was being worked on, (you answered this below)
or do I have to make heavily modified distro images?
On Friday 09 December 2005 12:39, Antoine Martin wrote:
Is this glibc? Any ideas?
Yes, I see that on Debian Sarge too. Don't ask me why fsck uses thread,
but it seems to do that.
I wasn't even thinking about that! So true, why on earth would fsck
require threading!?
fsck -A does all
On Thursday 08 December 2005 03:13, Antoine Martin wrote:
I'm still trying to get a regular FC4 image to boot with the latest x86
tls support code.
Mainline kernel or with jdike patchset?
(since Gentoo works fine)
but this is what I get:
# fsck.ext3 -a /dev/ubda
set_thread_area failed when
I'm still trying to get a regular FC4 image to boot with the latest x86
tls support code. (since Gentoo works fine)
but this is what I get:
# fsck.ext3 -a /dev/ubda
set_thread_area failed when setting up thread-local storage
Segmentation fault
Is this glibc? Any ideas?
Thanks
Antoine
