Skip early ld.so event

2008-02-12 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
This patch skips the first call to _dl_debug_state. This one's troublesome, because we have a non-empty list of shared libraries (it's got the application on it), but we don't have the ld.so interpreter on the list yet. So the current location is code that the debugger doesn't have symbols for.

Re: __uc_malloc

2008-02-12 Thread Denys Vlasenko
On Tuesday 12 February 2008 14:17, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > The __uc_malloc patch was a bit sloppy about the libc_hidden_proto > conventions in uClibc; as a result, more relocations than necessary are > generated for libc.so. The patch below fixes that. I took the liberty of applying your patch. Th

Re: Implementation of ether_line, ether_hostton and ether_ntohost

2008-02-12 Thread Carmelo Amoroso
Matthew Wilcox wrote: > I want to be able to etherwake by hostname. Since I've gone to the > trouble of putting that information in /etc/ethers, I think my computer > should jolly well not force me to type in meaningless strings of hex. > > So here's an implementation (ethers.c) and two test prog

Re: __uc_malloc

2008-02-12 Thread Denys Vlasenko
On Tuesday 12 February 2008 15:18, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > Denys Vlasenko wrote: > >> Before I apply this, I wanted to start a discussion about whether > >> __uc_malloc is a good idea at all. Space savings are all well and good, > >> but these come at a cost in reliability. > > > > There is no cos

Re: __uc_malloc

2008-02-12 Thread Bernd Schmidt
Denys Vlasenko wrote: >> Before I apply this, I wanted to start a discussion about whether >> __uc_malloc is a good idea at all. Space savings are all well and good, >> but these come at a cost in reliability. > > There is no cost in reliability. > > Face it: if you have no free memory - you hav

Re: __uc_malloc

2008-02-12 Thread Denys Vlasenko
On Tuesday 12 February 2008 13:17, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > The __uc_malloc patch was a bit sloppy about the libc_hidden_proto > conventions in uClibc; as a result, more relocations than necessary are > generated for libc.so. The patch below fixes that. > > Before I apply this, I wanted to start a

__uc_malloc

2008-02-12 Thread Bernd Schmidt
The __uc_malloc patch was a bit sloppy about the libc_hidden_proto conventions in uClibc; as a result, more relocations than necessary are generated for libc.so. The patch below fixes that. Before I apply this, I wanted to start a discussion about whether __uc_malloc is a good idea at all. Space