Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-15 Thread John David Anglin
> > no, it's not fakeroot, it's make segfaulting ... > [...] > > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. > > [Switching to Thread 16384 (LWP 16911)] > > 0x4091fd20 in __canonicalize_funcptr_for_compare () from > > /lib/libpthread.so.0 > > (gdb) bt > > #0 0x4091fd20 in __canonicalize_

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-14 Thread Randolph Chung
(I trimmed the cc list a bit) Dave, Could this actually be a gcc problem? Take a look at this: (gdb) bt #0 0x406dbd20 in __canonicalize_funcptr_for_compare () from /usr/lib/debug/libpthread.so.0 #1 0x406d7424 in __pthread_sigaction (sig=18, act=0xc0241ec8, oact=0xc0241f50) at signal

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-14 Thread Randolph Chung
> I would have thought that old (r11) would have just been copied to > r26. Could you send preprocessed source and compilation details? This is now filed as http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23369 I have reassigned the fakeroot bug to gcc-4.0 and marked it up accordingly. randolph --

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-13 Thread tsd78163
> The handling of function pointers in 4.0 branch was broken prior to > this change: > > 2005-07-02 Jeff Law <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * tree-ssa-dom.c (find_equivalent_equality_comparison): Do not > a eliminate type conversion which feeds an equality comparison > if the origin

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-13 Thread John David Anglin
> #1 0x406d7424 in __pthread_sigaction (sig=18, act=0xc0241ec8, > oact=0xc0241f50) > at signals.c:106 > 106 if (old == SIG_IGN || old == SIG_DFL || old == SIG_ERR) > (gdb) print &old > Address requested for identifier "old" which is in register $r11 > (gdb) print /x $r11 > $6 =

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-12 Thread John David Anglin
> > no, it's not fakeroot, it's make segfaulting ... > [...] > > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. > > [Switching to Thread 16384 (LWP 16911)] > > 0x4091fd20 in __canonicalize_funcptr_for_compare () from > > /lib/libpthread.so.0 > > (gdb) bt > > #0 0x4091fd20 in __canonicalize_

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-12 Thread Randolph Chung
> Well, sarge also shipped as 2.6-only, for hppa; so if the answer is that > this problem happens to go away when upgrading to 2.6, that's probably > acceptable, since 2.4 kernels will have been unsupported on hppa for a full > stable release by the time etch comes out. It doesn't go away with 2.6

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-12 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 11:51:30AM +0200, Joel Soete wrote: > > The buildd in question is currently running a 2.4.26-64 kernel. > Cool (I didn't thought that there was still systems running 2.4) Well, sarge also shipped as 2.6-only, for hppa; so if the answer is that this problem happens to go aw

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-12 Thread Joel Soete
> > The buildd in question is currently running a 2.4.26-64 kernel. > Cool (I didn't thought that there was still systems running 2.4) > > In fact while simply rebuilding a kernel (as root, without fakeroot), I also > > observe a segfault with 2.6.8 and 2.6.10 (on c110 and d380) but panicing > >

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-11 Thread Steve Langasek
,[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL > PROTECTED],debian-hppa@lists.debian.org,[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date : Wed, 10 Aug 2005 22:53:08 +0800 > Subject : Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa] > > >>Confirmed. We are passing a function pointer with a value of -2 into > &g

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-11 Thread Joel Soete
Date : Wed, 10 Aug 2005 22:53:08 +0800 Subject : Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa] > >>Confirmed. We are passing a function pointer with a value of -2 into > >>__cffc, which should not happen... > > > > > > Is -2 a special signal number? > >

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-10 Thread John David Anglin
> >>Confirmed. We are passing a function pointer with a value of -2 into > >>__cffc, which should not happen... > > > > > > Is -2 a special signal number? > > I don't think so. in any case, others have observed that if they use an > older glibc, this problem does not happen. Not sure this is r

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-10 Thread Randolph Chung
Confirmed. We are passing a function pointer with a value of -2 into __cffc, which should not happen... Is -2 a special signal number? I don't think so. in any case, others have observed that if they use an older glibc, this problem does not happen. randolph -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-10 Thread John David Anglin
> > no, it's not fakeroot, it's make segfaulting ... > [...] > > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. > > [Switching to Thread 16384 (LWP 16911)] > > 0x4091fd20 in __canonicalize_funcptr_for_compare () from > > /lib/libpthread.so.0 > > (gdb) bt > > #0 0x4091fd20 in __canonicalize_

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-10 Thread Randolph Chung
> no, it's not fakeroot, it's make segfaulting ... [...] > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. > [Switching to Thread 16384 (LWP 16911)] > 0x4091fd20 in __canonicalize_funcptr_for_compare () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 > (gdb) bt > #0 0x4091fd20 in __canonicalize_funcptr_for_compare

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-09 Thread Matthias Klose
--j79F1xXV029481.1123599719/bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de-- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#321785: fakeroot: segfaults on [hppa]

2005-08-08 Thread Clint Adams
> fakeroot-tcp shows the same behaviour. reverting back to glibc-2.3.2 > is a workaround. Does building fakeroot against glibc 2.3.5 change anything? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]