On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 10:16:47AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
>
> > Looks like a bug in glibc since it's meant to make the two symbols
> > identical:
> >
> > - Macro: int EAGAIN
> > Resource temporarily unavailable; the call might work if you try
> > again later. The macro `EWOULDBLO
At Tue, 22 Oct 2002 22:11:27 +1000,
Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 05:57:19AM -0600, John Marvin wrote:
> >
> > However, the code checks for EWOULDBLOCK, not EAGAIN. Other Unix OS's
> > might use EWOULDBLOCK in this case, but Linux uses EAGAIN. You should
> > not get an EWOULDBLOCK fr
On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 10:16:47AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
>
> > Looks like a bug in glibc since it's meant to make the two symbols
> > identical:
> >
> > - Macro: int EAGAIN
> > Resource temporarily unavailable; the call might work if you try
> > again later. The macro `EWOULDBLO
Repository: glibc-package/debian
who:gotom
time: Tue Oct 22 18:18:53 MDT 2002
Log Message:
- debian/libc/DEBIAN/postinst: add more NSS services:
rsh-server telnetd cyrus-imapd cyrus21-common uw-imapd
uw-imapd-ssl
Files:
changed:changelog
At Tue, 22 Oct 2002 05:28:57 -0700,
Jeff Bailey wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:45:42PM -0600, Debian GLibc CVS Master wrote:
>
> > - debian/libc/DEBIAN/postinst: add more NSS services.
>
> Can you please provide more detail in your ChangeLog entries?
Well... it's too minimal descripti
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 08:03:34PM -0700, Joseph Donaldson wrote:
> Package: Bigloo
> Version: 2.5b+really2.5c-beta-2002-09-23-2
>
>
> I am recieving the following error message when I
> attempt to run the bigloo compiler.
>
> bigloo: relocation error: bigloo: symbol
> __libc_stack_end, version
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 11:57:57PM +0100, Philip Blundell wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-10-22 at 12:54, Ben Collins wrote:
> > Speaking of which, I thought the USAGI guys had a patch to make 2.2.x
> > work correctly anyway?
>
> Not that I remember. I think USAGI gave up IPv6 on 2.2 as a lost cause
> some
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 05:49:46PM -0500, Zed Pobre wrote:
> > > Okay, the above is inflammatory, and I've debated deleting
> > > it with myself for a little while, but I'm going to let it
> > > stand, because some upgrade path is going to have to be provided
> > > by the next release --
> >
On Tue, 2002-10-22 at 12:54, Ben Collins wrote:
> Speaking of which, I thought the USAGI guys had a patch to make 2.2.x
> work correctly anyway?
Not that I remember. I think USAGI gave up IPv6 on 2.2 as a lost cause
some time ago. It would be worth checking, though.
p.
At Tue, 22 Oct 2002 22:11:27 +1000,
Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 05:57:19AM -0600, John Marvin wrote:
> >
> > However, the code checks for EWOULDBLOCK, not EAGAIN. Other Unix OS's
> > might use EWOULDBLOCK in this case, but Linux uses EAGAIN. You should
> > not get an EWOULDBLOCK fr
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: critical
Tags: sid patch
The apache2 package which provides /etc/init.d/apache2 is
apache2-common, thus the code in postinst fails to detect it.
A patch attached to fix it, is ugly but should work.
-Thom
--- /var/lib/dpkg/info/libc6.postinst 2002-10-1
Repository: glibc-package/debian
who:gotom
time: Tue Oct 22 18:18:53 MDT 2002
Log Message:
- debian/libc/DEBIAN/postinst: add more NSS services:
rsh-server telnetd cyrus-imapd cyrus21-common uw-imapd uw-imapd-ssl
Files:
changed:changelog
--
To UNSUBSC
At Tue, 22 Oct 2002 05:28:57 -0700,
Jeff Bailey wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:45:42PM -0600, Debian GLibc CVS Master wrote:
>
> > - debian/libc/DEBIAN/postinst: add more NSS services.
>
> Can you please provide more detail in your ChangeLog entries?
Well... it's too minimal descripti
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 08:03:34PM -0700, Joseph Donaldson wrote:
> Package: Bigloo
> Version: 2.5b+really2.5c-beta-2002-09-23-2
>
>
> I am recieving the following error message when I
> attempt to run the bigloo compiler.
>
> bigloo: relocation error: bigloo: symbol
> __libc_stack_end, version
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 11:57:57PM +0100, Philip Blundell wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-10-22 at 12:54, Ben Collins wrote:
> > Speaking of which, I thought the USAGI guys had a patch to make 2.2.x
> > work correctly anyway?
>
> Not that I remember. I think USAGI gave up IPv6 on 2.2 as a lost cause
> some
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 05:49:46PM -0500, Zed Pobre wrote:
> > > Okay, the above is inflammatory, and I've debated deleting
> > > it with myself for a little while, but I'm going to let it
> > > stand, because some upgrade path is going to have to be provided
> > > by the next release --
> >
On Tue, 2002-10-22 at 12:54, Ben Collins wrote:
> Speaking of which, I thought the USAGI guys had a patch to make 2.2.x
> work correctly anyway?
Not that I remember. I think USAGI gave up IPv6 on 2.2 as a lost cause
some time ago. It would be worth checking, though.
p.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, e
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: critical
Tags: sid patch
The apache2 package which provides /etc/init.d/apache2 is
apache2-common, thus the code in postinst fails to detect it.
A patch attached to fix it, is ugly but should work.
-Thom
--- /var/lib/dpkg/info/libc6.postinst 2002-10-1
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 12:43:16PM -0500, Zed Pobre wrote:
> Okay, the above is inflammatory, and I've debated deleting it
> with myself for a little while, but I'm going to let it stand,
> because some upgrade path is going to have to be provided by the
> next release --
Sadly, your rant is
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: wishlist
When upgrading from an older version libc6 asks the "Restarting services"
question. It would be nice if this would be asked via debconf to make
automated upgrades easier.
TIA
Adrian
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: normal
I'm not sure that this is related to libc6 rather than, say, pam.
Someone should confirm this.
I recently upgraded libc6 remotely on a system which uses kdm as
its login manager. After the upgrade, I was unable to log in from kdm,
although ssh
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It seems that longrun and similar programs (procmeter3 longrun support,
>> etc) are broken by the new libc.
>> This program should read the transmeta vendor cpuid:
>> #define CPUID_DEVICE "/dev/cpu/0/cpuid"
>> #define
Repository: glibc-package/debian/patches
who:jbailey
time: Tue Oct 22 10:45:32 MDT 2002
Log Message:
* Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- debian/patches/cvs.dpatch: New file.
- debian/patches/0list: Update
Files:
changed:0list
added: cvs.dpatch
Repository: glibc-package/debian
who:jbailey
time: Tue Oct 22 10:45:32 MDT 2002
Log Message:
* Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- debian/patches/cvs.dpatch: New file.
- debian/patches/0list: Update
Files:
changed:changelog control
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 01:54:10AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> Aha! On the off-chance, I tried this in a chroot with glibc 2.3.1 and it
> segfaulted. Ditto with en_US, which I'm guessing Branden's using.
You seem to have already narrowed this down, but yes, that's the case.
$ locale
LANG=POSIX
L
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 12:43:16PM -0500, Zed Pobre wrote:
> Okay, the above is inflammatory, and I've debated deleting it
> with myself for a little while, but I'm going to let it stand,
> because some upgrade path is going to have to be provided by the
> next release --
Sadly, your rant is
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: wishlist
When upgrading from an older version libc6 asks the "Restarting services"
question. It would be nice if this would be asked via debconf to make
automated upgrades easier.
TIA
Adrian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subjec
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 06:52:07AM -0700, David Panofsky wrote:
> The glibc source package refuses to build because two patches supplied have
> problems. This occurs in at least 2.3.1-2 & 2.3.1-3.
> Here is a transcript of a build attempt:
> <_---_Makeconfig~ 2001/09/12_18:49:45 1.265
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: normal
I'm not sure that this is related to libc6 rather than, say, pam.
Someone should confirm this.
I recently upgraded libc6 remotely on a system which uses kdm as
its login manager. After the upgrade, I was unable to log in from kdm,
although ssh
Repository: glibc-package/debian/packages.d
who:gotom
time: Tue Oct 22 08:30:48 MDT 2002
Log Message:
- debian/packages.d/sparc64.mk: fix build error.
Files:
changed:sparc64.mk
Repository: glibc-package/debian
who:gotom
time: Tue Oct 22 08:30:48 MDT 2002
Log Message:
- debian/packages.d/sparc64.mk: fix build error.
Files:
changed:changelog
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It seems that longrun and similar programs (procmeter3 longrun support,
>> etc) are broken by the new libc.
>> This program should read the transmeta vendor cpuid:
>> #define CPUID_DEVICE "/dev/cpu/0/cpuid"
>> #define
Repository: glibc-package/debian/patches
who:jbailey
time: Tue Oct 22 10:45:32 MDT 2002
Log Message:
* Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- debian/patches/cvs.dpatch: New file.
- debian/patches/0list: Update
Files:
changed:0list
added: cvs.dpatch
--
To UN
Repository: glibc-package/debian
who:jbailey
time: Tue Oct 22 10:45:32 MDT 2002
Log Message:
* Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- debian/patches/cvs.dpatch: New file.
- debian/patches/0list: Update
Files:
changed:changelog control
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.1-3
Followup-For: Bug #165358
Hi There,
>The trick here is that they're not calling waitpid, they're calling
>__libc_waitpid, which is not a published call. All internal
>interfaces are now hiden from user applications, and any applications
>which used them (despite t
Package: glibc
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: normal
The glibc source package refuses to build because two patches supplied have
problems. This occurs in at least 2.3.1-2 & 2.3.1-3.
Here is a transcript of a build attempt:
dpkg-buildpackage: source package is glibc
dpkg-buildpackage: source version
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 01:54:10AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> Aha! On the off-chance, I tried this in a chroot with glibc 2.3.1 and it
> segfaulted. Ditto with en_US, which I'm guessing Branden's using.
You seem to have already narrowed this down, but yes, that's the case.
$ locale
LANG=POSIX
L
Package: libc6-dbg
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: important
As the title says, it seems that the /usr/lib/debug/libc-2.3.1.so file
installed by the libc6-dbg package
does not contain debugging infos...
Am I right, or the xxx-dbg packages are intended to be used in
conjunction with the source packages
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 09:24:32AM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
>Is there a particular reason why debian ppc sid has not had any
> of the three glibc 2.3.1 package builds installed in it? We have been
> passing make check on all three and Daniel Jacobowitz has already
> requested that the ftp-mas
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 165881 libc6
Bug#165881: telnetd aborts when EAGAIN returned from writev
Bug reassigned from package `telnetd' to `libc6'.
> quit
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(a
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 08:56:43PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > Can you please provide a testcase that shows that this bug
> > actually belongs to glibc?
> Ugh, did you notice that rcmd(3) is part of glibc?
D'oh! I thought you were refering to a daemon! I'll look into it.
--
learning from fa
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 11:51:32AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> Please see http://bugs.debian.org/165603 for context. The summary is
> that apropos segfaults inside regexec() when using glibc 2.3.1 in a
> locale other than C. To reproduce, get
> http://people.debian.org/~branden/bug165603_index.bt
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:45:42PM -0600, Debian GLibc CVS Master wrote:
> - debian/libc/DEBIAN/postinst: add more NSS services.
Can you please provide more detail in your ChangeLog entries?
--
learning from failures is nice in theory...
but in practice, it sucks :)
- Wolfgang Jaehrling
reassign 165881 libc6
quit
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 05:57:19AM -0600, John Marvin wrote:
>
> However, the code checks for EWOULDBLOCK, not EAGAIN. Other Unix OS's
> might use EWOULDBLOCK in this case, but Linux uses EAGAIN. You should
> not get an EWOULDBLOCK from a write or writev call (I think L
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 06:52:07AM -0700, David Panofsky wrote:
> The glibc source package refuses to build because two patches supplied have
> problems. This occurs in at least 2.3.1-2 & 2.3.1-3.
> Here is a transcript of a build attempt:
> <_---_Makeconfig~ 2001/09/12_18:49:45 1.265
Repository: glibc-package/debian
who:gotom
time: Tue Oct 22 08:30:48 MDT 2002
Log Message:
- debian/packages.d/sparc64.mk: fix build error.
Files:
changed:changelog
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMA
Repository: glibc-package/debian/packages.d
who:gotom
time: Tue Oct 22 08:30:48 MDT 2002
Log Message:
- debian/packages.d/sparc64.mk: fix build error.
Files:
changed:sparc64.mk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble?
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 12:13:34PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 07:44:40AM -0700, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:26:31AM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > Is there any compromise we can reach *without* applying hacks that
> > > cover up the fact that glibc
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.1-3
Followup-For: Bug #165358
Hi There,
>The trick here is that they're not calling waitpid, they're calling
>__libc_waitpid, which is not a published call. All internal
>interfaces are now hiden from user applications, and any applications
>which used them (despite t
Package: glibc
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: normal
The glibc source package refuses to build because two patches supplied have
problems. This occurs in at least 2.3.1-2 & 2.3.1-3.
Here is a transcript of a build attempt:
dpkg-buildpackage: source package is glibc
dpkg-buildpackage: source version
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 07:44:40AM -0700, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:26:31AM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> > Is there any compromise we can reach *without* applying hacks that
> > cover up the fact that glibc doesn't cope with the differently-sized
> > kernel structure?
>
> Hal
Package: libc6-dbg
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: important
As the title says, it seems that the /usr/lib/debug/libc-2.3.1.so file
installed by the libc6-dbg package
does not contain debugging infos...
Am I right, or the xxx-dbg packages are intended to be used in
conjunction with the source package
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 09:24:32AM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
>Is there a particular reason why debian ppc sid has not had any
> of the three glibc 2.3.1 package builds installed in it? We have
> been passing make check on all three and Daniel Jacobowitz has
> already requested that the ftp-ma
Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can you please provide a testcase that shows that this bug actually
> belongs to glibc?
Ugh, did you notice that rcmd(3) is part of glibc?
--
Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Home P
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 165603 libc6
Bug#165603: man-db: SEGV in apropos when running "apropos xkb"
Bug reassigned from package `man-db' to `libc6'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrato
Is there a particular reason why debian ppc sid has not had any
of the three glibc 2.3.1 package builds installed in it? We have been
passing make check on all three and Daniel Jacobowitz has already
requested that the ftp-masters do this. Thanks in advance for any
help on this.
reassign 165603 libc6
thanks
Hi,
Please see http://bugs.debian.org/165603 for context. The summary is
that apropos segfaults inside regexec() when using glibc 2.3.1 in a
locale other than C. To reproduce, get
http://people.debian.org/~branden/bug165603_index.bt.bz2, uncompress,
install as ~/man/i
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 165881 libc6
Bug#165881: telnetd aborts when EAGAIN returned from writev
Bug reassigned from package `telnetd' to `libc6'.
> quit
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(a
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 08:56:43PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > Can you please provide a testcase that shows that this bug
> > actually belongs to glibc?
> Ugh, did you notice that rcmd(3) is part of glibc?
D'oh! I thought you were refering to a daemon! I'll look into it.
--
learning from fa
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 11:51:32AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> Please see http://bugs.debian.org/165603 for context. The summary is
> that apropos segfaults inside regexec() when using glibc 2.3.1 in a
> locale other than C. To reproduce, get
> http://people.debian.org/~branden/bug165603_index.bt
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:45:42PM -0600, Debian GLibc CVS Master wrote:
> - debian/libc/DEBIAN/postinst: add more NSS services.
Can you please provide more detail in your ChangeLog entries?
--
learning from failures is nice in theory...
but in practice, it sucks :)
- Wolfgang Jaehrling
reassign 165881 libc6
quit
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 05:57:19AM -0600, John Marvin wrote:
>
> However, the code checks for EWOULDBLOCK, not EAGAIN. Other Unix OS's
> might use EWOULDBLOCK in this case, but Linux uses EAGAIN. You should
> not get an EWOULDBLOCK from a write or writev call (I think L
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 12:13:34PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 07:44:40AM -0700, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:26:31AM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > Is there any compromise we can reach *without* applying hacks that
> > > cover up the fact that glibc
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 07:44:40AM -0700, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:26:31AM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> > Is there any compromise we can reach *without* applying hacks that
> > cover up the fact that glibc doesn't cope with the differently-sized
> > kernel structure?
>
> Hal
Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can you please provide a testcase that shows that this bug actually
> belongs to glibc?
Ugh, did you notice that rcmd(3) is part of glibc?
--
Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Home P
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 165603 libc6
Bug#165603: man-db: SEGV in apropos when running "apropos xkb"
Bug reassigned from package `man-db' to `libc6'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrato
reassign 165603 libc6
thanks
Hi,
Please see http://bugs.debian.org/165603 for context. The summary is
that apropos segfaults inside regexec() when using glibc 2.3.1 in a
locale other than C. To reproduce, get
http://people.debian.org/~branden/bug165603_index.bt.bz2, uncompress,
install as ~/man/i
Your message dated Tue, 22 Oct 2002 17:05:15 +0900
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#165858: libc6: wine breaks: symbol __libc_fork, version
GLIBC_2.1.2 not defined
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been
Why is this bug assigned for libc6? Which version is libc6 ?
BTW, this bug is appeared on woody (2.2.5-15), but
not on sid (2.3.1-3).
-- gotom
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: important
Tags: sid
With the new libc6, wine breaks with:
Invoking /usr/bin/wine.bin notepad ...
/usr/bin/wine.bin: relocation error: /usr/bin/../lib/libntdll.dll.so:
symbol __libc_fork, version GLIBC_2.1.2 not defined in file libc.so.6
with link time ref
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-885
Package: glibc-doc
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: normal
Hi,
here is the dangling symlink:
/usr/share/doc/glibc-doc/html/index.html -> chapters_toc.html
It should probably point to "libc.html" or "libc_toc.html".
One side effect of this bug is that the doc-base entry that refers to the
symlink
Your message dated Tue, 22 Oct 2002 17:05:15 +0900
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#165858: libc6: wine breaks: symbol __libc_fork, version
GLIBC_2.1.2 not defined
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been
Why is this bug assigned for libc6? Which version is libc6 ?
BTW, this bug is appeared on woody (2.2.5-15), but
not on sid (2.3.1-3).
-- gotom
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.1-3
Severity: important
Tags: sid
With the new libc6, wine breaks with:
Invoking /usr/bin/wine.bin notepad ...
/usr/bin/wine.bin: relocation error: /usr/bin/../lib/libntdll.dll.so:
symbol __libc_fork, version GLIBC_2.1.2 not defined in file libc.so.6
with link time ref
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-8859-1";
charset="ISO-885
76 matches
Mail list logo
