> 2) FESCo (Fedora Engineering Steering Committee) is dealing with the > issue upstream [1][2] in Fedora with the view of getting it fixed > upstream for F-14 or at the very least clarified. It was agreed in > F-12 that the Geode LX would be supported and that decision wasn't > discussed otherwise. Please add to the conversation on the ticket or > the list. It might be worth seeing the outcome of this before we go > and reinvent the wheel again. > > Peter > > [1] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-June/137070.html > (but thread goes back to April) > [2] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/387
It's nice to know we have the attention of the right folks. But there's some useful info we could give them for tomorrow's FESCo meeting. Do we know which i386/i686 packages in F13 actually contain NOPL instructions? Apparently, glibc does contain them, due to the report here from the beta: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579838 If fixing F13 would only require rebuilding five, ten, or twenty packages, then fixing it in the F13 repos (for everybody, not just for OLPC) is totally doable. If it requires a total rebuild, then the fix could only occur in the next Fedora release. This message suggested that the NOPL instruction doesn't appear in any of the coreutils programs: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-June/137144.html To figure this out, I downloaded and booted the F13 "i686" LiveCD and did this: for x in {,/usr}{/bin,/sbin,/lib}/* ; do echo $x objdump -d $x | grep nopl done It shows nopl's in: /sbin/ldconfig /sbin/mdadm.static, /sbin/sln /lib/ld-2.12.so /lib/ld-linux.so.2, /lib/libanl-2.12.so /lib/libanl.so.1 /lib/libc-2.12.so /lib/libcidn-2.12.so /lib/libcidn.so.1 /lib/libcrypt-2.12.so /lib/libcrypt.so.1 /lib/libc.so.6 /lib/libdl-2.12.so /lib/libdl.so.2 /lib/libm-2.12.so /lib/libm.so.6 /lib/libnsl-2.12.so /lib/libnsl.so.1 /lib/libnss_compat-2.12.so /lib/libnss_compat.so.2 /lib/libnss_dns-2.12.so /lib/libnss_dns.so.2 /lib/libnss_files-2.12.so /lib/libnss_files.so.2 /lib/libnss_hesiod-2.12.so /lib/libnss_hesiod.so.2 /lib/libnss_nis-2.12.so /lib/libnss_nisplus-2.12.so /lib/libnss_nisplus.so.2 /lib/libnss_nis.so.2 /lib/libpthread-2.12.so /lib/libpthread.so.0 /lib/libresolv-2.12.so /lib/libresolv.so.2 /lib/librt-2.12.so /lib/librt.so.1 /lib/libSegFault.so /lib/libthread_db-1.0.so /lib/libthread_db.so.1 /lib/libutil-2.12.so /lib/libutil.so.1 /usr/bin/gencat /usr/bin/getconf /usr/bin/getent /usr/bin/iconv /usr/bin/locale /usr/bin/localedef /usr/bin/rpcgen /usr/bin/sprof /usr/sbin/build-locale-archive /usr/sbin/glibc_post_upgrade.i686 /usr/sbin/iconvconfig /usr/sbin/iconvconfig.i686 /usr/sbin/nscd /usr/sbin/prelink /usr/sbin/zdump /usr/sbin/zic There are no nopl's anywhere under /lib/modules. objdump couldn't examine the mashed kernel image in /boot, but I bet it's free or almost free of nopl's. Virtually all of these files are generated from the libc sources (except two executables statically-linked with libc). In short, this is almost exclusively a glibc problem. It's probably just a bug introduced into the glibc configuration or makefile in F13. Fedora Bug 579838 should be reopened -- it was inappropriately closed by Andreas Schwab on 2010-04-07. (Jakub's comment wasn't pretty, but he didn't close the bug - Andreas did. But closing bugs inappropriately to make your bug stats look good is rampant in every development org - e.g. I regularly complain to Ubuntu about this.) This is not a dead issue for F13, and we should seek solutions within F13 as well as outside it. Oddly, F13 offers release CDs and DVDs only for "i386" (and x86-64), but offers live CDs only for "i686" (and x86-64). It is completely unclear from the documentation (which suggests using these interchangeably) whether the "i386" DVD is really compiled for i686 or i386. See: http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-options (hover over the "Download Now" buttons to see which ISO image each one offers.) http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/13/html/Installation_Guide/ch-new-users.html#sn-which-arch John _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel