Yes, maybe it is a compiler issue. I tried to write a small test case that isolates the problem, and I think that I have succeeded. It needs to be (like mountall) compiled with both -fPIE and -Os to actually show the problem, so my guess is that something important is being optimized away.
This is the output from the "problematic system": da...@ibook:~$ uname -a Linux ibook 2.6.31-10-powerpc #34-Ubuntu Tue Sep 15 23:53:36 UTC 2009 ppc GNU/Linux da...@ibook:~$ gcc --version | head -n1 gcc (Ubuntu 4.4.1-4ubuntu1) 4.4.1 da...@ibook:~$ gcc -fPIE -Os test.c -o gcc-test && ./gcc-test a in extern_func: 123456789 a in intern_func: -1077763264 This is the output from an x86 system running debian, showing the "expected" output: da...@fww:~$ uname -a Linux fww 2.6.26-2-686 #1 SMP Fri Aug 14 01:27:18 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux da...@fww:~$ gcc --version | head -n 1 gcc (Debian 4.3.2-1.1) 4.3.2 da...@fww:~$ gcc -fPIE -Os test.c -o gcc-test && ./gcc-test a in extern_func: 123456789 a in intern_func: 123456789 As you can see the compilers aren't exactly comparable, but nevertheless it seems to point at a real problem with gcc. Test app is attached. As said, this seems to happen only if the flags -fPIE and -Os are specified. ** Attachment added: "Test case showing broken(?) powerpc gcc" http://launchpadlibrarian.net/32145646/test.c ** Summary changed: - boot fails, mountall likely culprit + mountall fails, broken (powerpc?) gcc? -- mountall fails, broken (powerpc?) gcc? https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/432222 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
