Bug#215463: fenris: FTBFS: Cannot execute /lib/libc.so.6
Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 08:37:21AM -0800, Daniel Schepler wrote: >> Package: fenris >> Severity: serious >> Version: 1:0.07build3244-2.1 >> >> >From my build log: >> >> ... >> [+] Version (build): 0.07-m (3244) >> [*] Overriding sanity checks! Yuppi! >> [+] Operating system check: Linux (supported) >> [+] Processor check: i686 (supported) >> [+] GNU C library version: ./build: line 1: /lib/libc.so.6: Permission denied >> cannot determine libc version! >> [-] I am affraid I cannot continue. Please consult documentation. >> >> make: *** [build-stamp] Error 1 >> >> I think that file was made non-executable because even if it were >> executable, the dynamic loader would fail with a failed assertion. I >> guess you'll have to find another method to find the glibc version. > > (irrespective of whether it is a sane thing to do) > The dynamic loader do not fail: > > %/lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/libc.so.6 > GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.2, by Roland McGrath et al. > Copyright (C) 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. > There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A > PARTICULAR PURPOSE. > Compiled by GNU CC version 3.3.3 20031206 (prerelease) (Debian). > Compiled on a Linux 2.6.0-test7 system on 2004-01-20. > Available extensions: > GNU libio by Per Bothner > crypt add-on version 2.1 by Michael Glad and others > linuxthreads-0.10 by Xavier Leroy > BIND-8.2.3-T5B > libthread_db work sponsored by Alpha Processor Inc > NIS(YP)/NIS+ NSS modules 0.19 by Thorsten Kukuk > Thread-local storage support included. > Report bugs using the `glibcbug' script to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. That's strange, it still gives the assertion failure on my machine: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/libc.so.6 Inconsistency detected by ld.so: rtld.c: 1259: dl_main: Assertion `_rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_prev->l_next == _rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_next' failed! [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/tls/libc.so.6 Inconsistency detected by ld.so: rtld.c: 1259: dl_main: Assertion `_rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_prev->l_next == _rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_next' failed! [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6 Inconsistency detected by ld.so: rtld.c: 1259: dl_main: Assertion `_rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_prev->l_next == _rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_next' failed! > /lib/libc.so.6 in woody is executable, FWIW. > Glibc maintainers: was it changed on purpose ? > changelog is unclear about it. I think it was probably intentional; see bug #215463. -- Daniel Schepler "Please don't disillusion me. I [EMAIL PROTECTED]haven't had breakfast yet." -- Orson Scott Card
Bug#215463: fenris: FTBFS: Cannot execute /lib/libc.so.6
Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 08:37:21AM -0800, Daniel Schepler wrote: >> Package: fenris >> Severity: serious >> Version: 1:0.07build3244-2.1 >> >> >From my build log: >> >> ... >> [+] Version (build): 0.07-m (3244) >> [*] Overriding sanity checks! Yuppi! >> [+] Operating system check: Linux (supported) >> [+] Processor check: i686 (supported) >> [+] GNU C library version: ./build: line 1: /lib/libc.so.6: Permission denied >> cannot determine libc version! >> [-] I am affraid I cannot continue. Please consult documentation. >> >> make: *** [build-stamp] Error 1 >> >> I think that file was made non-executable because even if it were >> executable, the dynamic loader would fail with a failed assertion. I >> guess you'll have to find another method to find the glibc version. > > (irrespective of whether it is a sane thing to do) > The dynamic loader do not fail: > > %/lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/libc.so.6 > GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.2, by Roland McGrath et al. > Copyright (C) 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. > There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A > PARTICULAR PURPOSE. > Compiled by GNU CC version 3.3.3 20031206 (prerelease) (Debian). > Compiled on a Linux 2.6.0-test7 system on 2004-01-20. > Available extensions: > GNU libio by Per Bothner > crypt add-on version 2.1 by Michael Glad and others > linuxthreads-0.10 by Xavier Leroy > BIND-8.2.3-T5B > libthread_db work sponsored by Alpha Processor Inc > NIS(YP)/NIS+ NSS modules 0.19 by Thorsten Kukuk > Thread-local storage support included. > Report bugs using the `glibcbug' script to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. That's strange, it still gives the assertion failure on my machine: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/libc.so.6 Inconsistency detected by ld.so: rtld.c: 1259: dl_main: Assertion `_rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_prev->l_next == _rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_next' failed! [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/tls/libc.so.6 Inconsistency detected by ld.so: rtld.c: 1259: dl_main: Assertion `_rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_prev->l_next == _rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_next' failed! [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6 Inconsistency detected by ld.so: rtld.c: 1259: dl_main: Assertion `_rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_prev->l_next == _rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_next' failed! > /lib/libc.so.6 in woody is executable, FWIW. > Glibc maintainers: was it changed on purpose ? > changelog is unclear about it. I think it was probably intentional; see bug #215463. -- Daniel Schepler "Please don't disillusion me. I [EMAIL PROTECTED]haven't had breakfast yet." -- Orson Scott Card -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: submitter 155690
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1 > submitter 155690 ! Bug#155690: libc6: More detailed logging during build Changed Bug submitter from "Jeff Bailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Processed: submitter 213535
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1 > submitter 213535 ! Bug#213535: vsftp service should be reset on NSS upgrade Changed Bug submitter from Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Processed: submitter 155690
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1 > submitter 155690 ! Bug#155690: libc6: More detailed logging during build Changed Bug submitter from "Jeff Bailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: submitter 213535
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.7.95.1 > submitter 213535 ! Bug#213535: vsftp service should be reset on NSS upgrade Changed Bug submitter from Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: fenris: FTBFS: Cannot execute /lib/libc.so.6
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 08:37:21AM -0800, Daniel Schepler wrote: > Package: fenris > Severity: serious > Version: 1:0.07build3244-2.1 > > >From my build log: > > ... > [+] Version (build): 0.07-m (3244) > [*] Overriding sanity checks! Yuppi! > [+] Operating system check: Linux (supported) > [+] Processor check: i686 (supported) > [+] GNU C library version: ./build: line 1: /lib/libc.so.6: Permission denied > cannot determine libc version! > [-] I am affraid I cannot continue. Please consult documentation. > > make: *** [build-stamp] Error 1 > > I think that file was made non-executable because even if it were > executable, the dynamic loader would fail with a failed assertion. I > guess you'll have to find another method to find the glibc version. (irrespective of whether it is a sane thing to do) The dynamic loader do not fail: %/lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/libc.so.6 GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.2, by Roland McGrath et al. Copyright (C) 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Compiled by GNU CC version 3.3.3 20031206 (prerelease) (Debian). Compiled on a Linux 2.6.0-test7 system on 2004-01-20. Available extensions: GNU libio by Per Bothner crypt add-on version 2.1 by Michael Glad and others linuxthreads-0.10 by Xavier Leroy BIND-8.2.3-T5B libthread_db work sponsored by Alpha Processor Inc NIS(YP)/NIS+ NSS modules 0.19 by Thorsten Kukuk Thread-local storage support included. Report bugs using the `glibcbug' script to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. /lib/libc.so.6 in woody is executable, FWIW. Glibc maintainers: was it changed on purpose ? changelog is unclear about it. Cheers, Bill
Bug#231426: marked as done (libc6: won't find libraries linked with -R)
Your message dated Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:19:35 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#231426: libc6: won't find libraries linked with -R has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 6 Feb 2004 14:42:24 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Feb 06 06:42:24 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mbww-www.zdv.uni-mainz.de [134.93.144.218] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1Ap7BY-0002y6-00; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:42:24 -0800 Received: from mbww-www.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mbww-www.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id i16Efcmg028859 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=FAIL); Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:41:39 +0100 Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by mbww-www.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) id i16Efc4w028857; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:41:38 +0100 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Christoph Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: libc6: won't find libraries linked with -R X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50 Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:41:38 +0100 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.38 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_01 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.0 required=4.0 tests=DATING,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_01 X-Spam-Level: Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.2.ds1-11 Severity: important I am using Sophos for Linux which is linked against it's own library in /usr/local/Sophos/lib apparently with -R. libc6 Version 2.3.2.ds1-10 would run the binary without a problem: ldd /usr/local/Sophos/bin/sweep libsavi.so.3 => /usr/local/Sophos/lib/libsavi.so.3 (0x4001f000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x4016f000) libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x402a1000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000) After updating to Version -11. libsavi.so.3 would not be found anymore: ldd /usr/local/Sophos/bin/sweep libsavi.so.3 => not found libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x4001c000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000) If I make a Link to /usr/lib it is working again: ln -s /usr/local/Sophos/lib/libsavi.so.3 /usr/lib/ ldd /usr/local/Sophos/bin/sweep libsavi.so.3 => /usr/lib/libsavi.so.3 (0x4001c000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x4016c000) libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x4029f000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000) When linked with -R, libraries in other paths should not be used. Perhaps the severity of the bugreport should be higher. Christoph -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux mbww-www.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE 2.4.20 #1 SMP Thu Jul 17 10:26:40 CEST 2003 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C Versions of packages libc6 depends on: ii libdb1-compat 2.1.3-7The Berkeley database routines [gl --- Received: (at 231426-done) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Feb 2004 15:19:46 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Feb 13 07:19:46 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from sky.verwaltung.uni-mainz.de [134.93.144.163] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1Arf6Y-0007PY-00; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 07:19:46 -0800 Received: from charlie.verwaltung.uni-mainz.de (charlie.verwaltung.uni-mainz.de [134.93.226.11]) by sky.verwaltung.uni-mainz.de (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id i1DFJhoS006485 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=FAIL); Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:19:44 +0100 Received: from uni-mainz.de ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [134.93.226.8]) by charlie.verwaltung.uni-mainz.de (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id i1DFJZHp020526 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:19:36 +0100 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:19:35 +0100 From: Christoph Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; de-AT; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031115 Debian/1.5-3.he-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#231426: libc6: won't find libraries linked with -R References: <[EMAIL PROTE
Re: fenris: FTBFS: Cannot execute /lib/libc.so.6
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 08:37:21AM -0800, Daniel Schepler wrote: > Package: fenris > Severity: serious > Version: 1:0.07build3244-2.1 > > >From my build log: > > ... > [+] Version (build): 0.07-m (3244) > [*] Overriding sanity checks! Yuppi! > [+] Operating system check: Linux (supported) > [+] Processor check: i686 (supported) > [+] GNU C library version: ./build: line 1: /lib/libc.so.6: Permission denied > cannot determine libc version! > [-] I am affraid I cannot continue. Please consult documentation. > > make: *** [build-stamp] Error 1 > > I think that file was made non-executable because even if it were > executable, the dynamic loader would fail with a failed assertion. I > guess you'll have to find another method to find the glibc version. (irrespective of whether it is a sane thing to do) The dynamic loader do not fail: %/lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/libc.so.6 GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.2, by Roland McGrath et al. Copyright (C) 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Compiled by GNU CC version 3.3.3 20031206 (prerelease) (Debian). Compiled on a Linux 2.6.0-test7 system on 2004-01-20. Available extensions: GNU libio by Per Bothner crypt add-on version 2.1 by Michael Glad and others linuxthreads-0.10 by Xavier Leroy BIND-8.2.3-T5B libthread_db work sponsored by Alpha Processor Inc NIS(YP)/NIS+ NSS modules 0.19 by Thorsten Kukuk Thread-local storage support included. Report bugs using the `glibcbug' script to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. /lib/libc.so.6 in woody is executable, FWIW. Glibc maintainers: was it changed on purpose ? changelog is unclear about it. Cheers, Bill -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#231426: marked as done (libc6: won't find libraries linked with -R)
Your message dated Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:19:35 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#231426: libc6: won't find libraries linked with -R has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 6 Feb 2004 14:42:24 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Feb 06 06:42:24 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mbww-www.zdv.uni-mainz.de [134.93.144.218] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1Ap7BY-0002y6-00; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 06:42:24 -0800 Received: from mbww-www.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mbww-www.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id i16Efcmg028859 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=FAIL); Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:41:39 +0100 Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by mbww-www.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) id i16Efc4w028857; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:41:38 +0100 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Christoph Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: libc6: won't find libraries linked with -R X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50 Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:41:38 +0100 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.38 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_01 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.0 required=4.0 tests=DATING,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_01 X-Spam-Level: Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.2.ds1-11 Severity: important I am using Sophos for Linux which is linked against it's own library in /usr/local/Sophos/lib apparently with -R. libc6 Version 2.3.2.ds1-10 would run the binary without a problem: ldd /usr/local/Sophos/bin/sweep libsavi.so.3 => /usr/local/Sophos/lib/libsavi.so.3 (0x4001f000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x4016f000) libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x402a1000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000) After updating to Version -11. libsavi.so.3 would not be found anymore: ldd /usr/local/Sophos/bin/sweep libsavi.so.3 => not found libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x4001c000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000) If I make a Link to /usr/lib it is working again: ln -s /usr/local/Sophos/lib/libsavi.so.3 /usr/lib/ ldd /usr/local/Sophos/bin/sweep libsavi.so.3 => /usr/lib/libsavi.so.3 (0x4001c000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x4016c000) libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x4029f000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000) When linked with -R, libraries in other paths should not be used. Perhaps the severity of the bugreport should be higher. Christoph -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux mbww-www.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE 2.4.20 #1 SMP Thu Jul 17 10:26:40 CEST 2003 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C Versions of packages libc6 depends on: ii libdb1-compat 2.1.3-7The Berkeley database routines [gl --- Received: (at 231426-done) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Feb 2004 15:19:46 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Feb 13 07:19:46 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from sky.verwaltung.uni-mainz.de [134.93.144.163] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1Arf6Y-0007PY-00; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 07:19:46 -0800 Received: from charlie.verwaltung.uni-mainz.de (charlie.verwaltung.uni-mainz.de [134.93.226.11]) by sky.verwaltung.uni-mainz.de (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id i1DFJhoS006485 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=FAIL); Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:19:44 +0100 Received: from uni-mainz.de ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [134.93.226.8]) by charlie.verwaltung.uni-mainz.de (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id i1DFJZHp020526 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:19:36 +0100 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:19:35 +0100 From: Christoph Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; de-AT; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031115 Debian/1.5-3.he-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#231426: libc6: won't find libraries linked with -R References: <[EMAIL PROTEC
Bug#231538: A possible solution
A simple way to avoid problems when dist-upgrading would be to check in the preinst for a working bswap. A small precompiled static binary could be added to the preinst (it doesn't even have to use a C library, see http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/software/tiny/teensy.html) and run to check if using the emulated opcodes won't die with SIGILL or SIGSEGV. -- Cesar Eduardo Barros [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#231538: A possible solution
A simple way to avoid problems when dist-upgrading would be to check in the preinst for a working bswap. A small precompiled static binary could be added to the preinst (it doesn't even have to use a C library, see http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/software/tiny/teensy.html) and run to check if using the emulated opcodes won't die with SIGILL or SIGSEGV. -- Cesar Eduardo Barros [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
