Re: [Fink-devel] Re: setsid error message
It appears that xdvi is trying to call setsid() after vfork(). Just about the only valid thing to do after vfork() is exec(). I'll bet this is your problem. You may try examining xdvi's usage of setsid() after the vfork(). However, it looks like the parent is simply exiting after the vfork. In that case, you can change the vfork to a fork, and all will be well. Rob On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:53:07AM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, I can read the setsid manpage, too, but it doesn't provide much edification as to precisely why mktexpk fails with that message when run from xdvi, but when run from the command line with the same arguments seems to work perfectly. In fact, I'm not actually convinced that mktexpk is being called at all. I have put a copy of the decoded ktrace on the web at http://www.rattus.net/~packrat/software/files/xdvi.trace.gz(360kb) with the trace all decendants flags on so that the location of the setsid stuff is visible. The relevant parts are of the following form: 11520 xdvi.xdvi GIO fd 1 wrote 79 bytes - mktexpk --mfmode ljfour --bdpi 600 --mag 'magstep(0)' --dpi 600 cmmi\ 10 '3' 11520 xdvi.xdvi RET write 79/0x4f 11520 xdvi.xdvi CALL vfork 11521 xdvi.xdvi RET vfork 11521/0x2d01 11521 xdvi.xdvi CALL close(0x6) 11521 xdvi.xdvi RET close 0 11521 xdvi.xdvi CALL dup2(0x7,0x3) 11521 xdvi.xdvi RET dup2 3 11521 xdvi.xdvi CALL close(0x7) 11521 xdvi.xdvi RET close 0 11521 xdvi.xdvi CALL setsid 11521 xdvi.xdvi RET setsid -1 errno 1 Operation not permitted 11521 xdvi.xdvi CALL writev(0x2,0xb350,0x4) 11521 xdvi.xdvi GIO fd 2 wrote 32 bytes setsid: Operation not permitted 11521 xdvi.xdvi RET writev 32/0x20 11521 xdvi.xdvi CALL exit(0x1) 11520 xdvi.xdvi RET vfork 11521/0x2d01 11520 xdvi.xdvi PSIG SIGCHLD caught handler=0xa2e4 mask=0x0 code=0x0 What precisely was the function of the setsid call in xdvi and why is xdvi being killed by a return code which is (from the point of view of setsid) hardly fatal? B -- Packrat (BSc/BE;COSO;Wombat Implementor) Nihil illegitemi carborvndvm. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] problems with g77 3.4 segmentation faults
William Scott wrote:
[]
Is there any way to have version 3.1 and 3.3 cohabitating in 10.3?
I don't think there is a reasonable way to have two *installed* versions
of g77 cohabitate. For two *package descriptions* cohabitating, the
right way would be to create a g77-3.1 package, i.e. instead of
Package: g77
Version: 3.1-20020420
Revision: 6
make it
Package: g77-3.1
Version: 20020420
Revision: 6
and make it conflict/replace with g77.
BUT:
Whereas the fatal bug of g77-3.1 is clearly documented(*) and has not
gone away with Panther, the bugs with g77-3.4 that have been reported
here do not seem to be deterministic. At least I haven't seen bug
reports that can be reproduced by everyone.
I don't think Jeff or anyone else feels the need to have the very latest
g77 version. The only criterion is to have a fortran compiler that just
works. And so far the best strategy seemed to be to use recent snapshots
in order to take advantage of the bug fixes that went into the
official gcc sources.
I've
noticed that some other people have had problems too. Alternatively, is
there a way for me to install 3.1 and avoid having fink try to
auto-update it to 3.4 every time I issue fink update-all? The latter
would solve my problem, but I still can't put some of my packages into
10.3 until I can get them to compile.
(*) Contrary to what some have reported here, the gcc3.3 of Panther
still has the bug where a trivial program defining an empty struct does
not compile. Compiling the 2-liner
struct { } foo = { };
void * bar(void) { return foo; }
with gcc-3.3 gives
costabel% gcc test_c.c
/var/tmp//cc7djqBM.s:22:section difference relocatable subtraction
expression, _foo minus L001$pb using a symbol at the end of
section will not produce an assembly time constant
/var/tmp//cc7djqBM.s:22:use a symbol with a constant value created with
an assignment instead of the expression, L_const_sym = _foo -
L001$pb
/var/tmp//cc7djqBM.s:21:section difference relocatable subtraction
expression, _foo minus L001$pb using a symbol at the end of
section will not produce an assembly time constant
/var/tmp//cc7djqBM.s:21:use a symbol with a constant value created with
an assignment instead of the expression, L_const_sym = _foo -
L001$pb
With g77-3.1, the following program gives the same error message. Even a
program consisting only of 1 line end gives the same error:
costabel% cat test_f.f
program hello
write(6, '(1X,A)') 'Hello world'
end
[abook:]costabel% g77 test_f.f
/var/tmp//ccAvjI34.s:48:section difference relocatable subtraction
expression, LC3 minus L1$pb using a symbol at the end of section
will not produce an assembly time constant
/var/tmp//ccAvjI34.s:48:use a symbol with a constant value created with
an assignment instead of the expression, L_const_sym = LC3 - L1$pb
/var/tmp//ccAvjI34.s:47:section difference relocatable subtraction
expression, LC3 minus L1$pb using a symbol at the end of section
will not produce an assembly time constant
/var/tmp//ccAvjI34.s:47:use a symbol with a constant value created with
an assignment instead of the expression, L_const_sym = LC3 - L1$pb
The accepted way to correct this bug with g77 prior to 3.4 was to
replace the assembler in /usr/libexec/gcc/darwin/ppc/ by an older one
from the Dec2002 dev tools (or to install an as package that does this),
and I don't think anyone wants to do this on Panther.
--
Martin
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it
help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help
YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
___
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] problems with g77 3.4 segmentation faults
William and Martin: I've verified that the latest released g77 (3.3.2)
does not have the assembler bug present in 3.1,3.3.1 and Apple's
3.3-20030304. As Martin pointed out, the reason I put the 3.4 package in,
even though it is not a released version of g77, is that it was the only
version that didn't have the bug at the time. William - I've put 3.3.2 in
10.3 unstable, please try it on your packages, if it works for them (and
all the other fortran packages) I can make it the primary g77 version
either by using Martin's trick, or adding Epoch: 1 to the info file.
-Jeff
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Martin Costabel wrote:
William Scott wrote:
[]
Is there any way to have version 3.1 and 3.3 cohabitating in 10.3?
I don't think there is a reasonable way to have two *installed* versions
of g77 cohabitate. For two *package descriptions* cohabitating, the
right way would be to create a g77-3.1 package, i.e. instead of
Package: g77
Version: 3.1-20020420
Revision: 6
make it
Package: g77-3.1
Version: 20020420
Revision: 6
and make it conflict/replace with g77.
BUT:
Whereas the fatal bug of g77-3.1 is clearly documented(*) and has not
gone away with Panther, the bugs with g77-3.4 that have been reported
here do not seem to be deterministic. At least I haven't seen bug
reports that can be reproduced by everyone.
I don't think Jeff or anyone else feels the need to have the very latest
g77 version. The only criterion is to have a fortran compiler that just
works. And so far the best strategy seemed to be to use recent snapshots
in order to take advantage of the bug fixes that went into the
official gcc sources.
I've
noticed that some other people have had problems too. Alternatively, is
there a way for me to install 3.1 and avoid having fink try to
auto-update it to 3.4 every time I issue fink update-all? The latter
would solve my problem, but I still can't put some of my packages into
10.3 until I can get them to compile.
(*) Contrary to what some have reported here, the gcc3.3 of Panther
still has the bug where a trivial program defining an empty struct does
not compile. Compiling the 2-liner
struct { } foo = { };
void * bar(void) { return foo; }
with gcc-3.3 gives
costabel% gcc test_c.c
/var/tmp//cc7djqBM.s:22:section difference relocatable subtraction
expression, _foo minus L001$pb using a symbol at the end of
section will not produce an assembly time constant
/var/tmp//cc7djqBM.s:22:use a symbol with a constant value created with
an assignment instead of the expression, L_const_sym = _foo -
L001$pb
/var/tmp//cc7djqBM.s:21:section difference relocatable subtraction
expression, _foo minus L001$pb using a symbol at the end of
section will not produce an assembly time constant
/var/tmp//cc7djqBM.s:21:use a symbol with a constant value created with
an assignment instead of the expression, L_const_sym = _foo -
L001$pb
With g77-3.1, the following program gives the same error message. Even a
program consisting only of 1 line end gives the same error:
costabel% cat test_f.f
program hello
write(6, '(1X,A)') 'Hello world'
end
[abook:]costabel% g77 test_f.f
/var/tmp//ccAvjI34.s:48:section difference relocatable subtraction
expression, LC3 minus L1$pb using a symbol at the end of section
will not produce an assembly time constant
/var/tmp//ccAvjI34.s:48:use a symbol with a constant value created with
an assignment instead of the expression, L_const_sym = LC3 - L1$pb
/var/tmp//ccAvjI34.s:47:section difference relocatable subtraction
expression, LC3 minus L1$pb using a symbol at the end of section
will not produce an assembly time constant
/var/tmp//ccAvjI34.s:47:use a symbol with a constant value created with
an assignment instead of the expression, L_const_sym = LC3 - L1$pb
The accepted way to correct this bug with g77 prior to 3.4 was to
replace the assembler in /usr/libexec/gcc/darwin/ppc/ by an older one
from the Dec2002 dev tools (or to install an as package that does this),
and I don't think anyone wants to do this on Panther.
--
Jeffrey S. Whitaker Phone : (303)497-6313
NOAA/OAR/CDC R/CDC1FAX : (303)497-6449
325 BroadwayWeb : http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/~jsw
Boulder, CO, USA 80305-3328 Office: Skaggs Research Cntr 1D-124
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it
help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help
YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
___
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Re: setsid error message
I had the same problem with proftpd, but setsid was called after fork(); I put in a debug printout in between them and it worked... On 7-Nov-03, at 12:29 AM, Rob Braun wrote: It appears that xdvi is trying to call setsid() after vfork(). Just about the only valid thing to do after vfork() is exec(). I'll bet this is your problem. You may try examining xdvi's usage of setsid() after the vfork(). However, it looks like the parent is simply exiting after the vfork. In that case, you can change the vfork to a fork, and all will be well. Rob --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Re: setsid error message
just sent a fixed (working) version of xdvi to the maintainer... On 7-Nov-03, at 8:03 AM, TheSin wrote: I had the same problem with proftpd, but setsid was called after fork(); I put in a debug printout in between them and it worked... On 7-Nov-03, at 12:29 AM, Rob Braun wrote: It appears that xdvi is trying to call setsid() after vfork(). Just about the only valid thing to do after vfork() is exec(). I'll bet this is your problem. You may try examining xdvi's usage of setsid() after the vfork(). However, it looks like the parent is simply exiting after the vfork. In that case, you can change the vfork to a fork, and all will be well. Rob --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] Package movement requested
Hi, the version of xplanet in 10.3 unstable is broken. The revision does not match the names of the package and patch. It must have happened while someone was updating the package with a script or something. I have put an updated version of xplanet in the package tracker that should be good for all variants of unstable (10.2, 10.2-gcc3.3 and 10.3). Could someone please put it into these unstable trees and remove the out of date versions? TIA --- This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003, 16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL, WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/ ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] Change of email address
Hi! For those that are interested, I have changed my email for Fink-related matters to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . I should still be contactable at [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a little bit longer, but I don't know how long exactly. I'll be changing the emails listed in my packages as soon as I can, as well as my subscription to the fink mailing lists, so any correspondence should go to the new address. Thanks! --- This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003, 16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL, WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/ ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
