Sean McGovern <[email protected]> writes:

> On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Sean McGovern <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 2011/10/21 Måns Rullgård <[email protected]>:
>>> "Sean McGovern" <[email protected]> writes:
>>>
>
> [snip..]
>
>>> the same thing.  Since they probably won't, installing a simple wrapper
>>> as /bin/sh will work as well.  Something like this should do it:
>>>
>>> #include <stdlib.h>
>>> #include <unistd.h>
>>>
>>> int main(int argc, char **argv)
>>> {
>>>    if (getenv("_XPG"))
>>>        execv("/usr/xpg4/bin/sh", argv);
>>>    else
>>>        execv("/bin/sh.real", argv);
>>>    return 127;
>>> }
>>
>> Finally got around to trying this (thanks Mans!) -- apparently
>> /usr/xpg4/bin/sh doesn't like configure, as it crashes the shell it's
>> running in. Can I make configure verbose enough to tell me which line
>> (or approximate line) it's crapping out on?
>>
>> Switching the execv() to call /usr/bin/bash instead works, but I'm
>> curious as to what isn't working in the xpg4 shell.
>
> Found it! The SIGTERM generated by check_exec_crash() seems to bubble
> up to the shell and kill it. I guess it's not actually running in a
> subshell like the comments above it suggest?

That reminds me, I'd like to get rid of that test.  Does anyone remember
why a pure compile-test was deemed insufficient here?

-- 
Måns Rullgård
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to