On 16/12/2011 18.36, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 05:59:16PM +0100, Carmelo Amoroso wrote: >> On 16/12/11 15:57, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: >>> I was able to fix the issue like this: >>> >>> --- uClibc-0.9.33/libpthread/nptl/sysdeps/pthread/sigaction.c.orig >>> 2011-12-03 18:55:45.000000000 +0100 >>> +++ uClibc-0.9.33/libpthread/nptl/sysdeps/pthread/sigaction.c >>> 2011-12-14 11:48:52.000000000 +0100 >>> @@ -38,9 +38,9 @@ >>> >>> return __libc_sigaction (sig, act, oact); >>> } >>> -libc_hidden_proto(sigaction) >>> +hidden_proto(sigaction) >>> weak_alias (__sigaction, sigaction) >>> -libc_hidden_weak(sigaction) >>> +hidden_weak(sigaction) >>> >>> #else >>> > ... >> I think that the proper fix is to remove sigaction from libpthread,a instead. > > But they are not identical, libpthread/nptl/sysdeps/pthread/sigaction.c > has this comment: > > /* We use the libc implementation but we tell it to not allow > SIGCANCEL or SIGTIMER to be handled. */ > >
you're right. I have now some free time to look at pending patches. It's on my queue. Carmelo > Johannes > _______________________________________________ > uClibc mailing list > uClibc@uclibc.org > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc > _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list uClibc@uclibc.org http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
