From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from megatonmonkey.net (cr821974-a.lndn1.on.wave.home.com [24.112.53.173]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0CB6482A for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2001 18:14:58 -0600 (MDT) Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 20:16:25 -0400 From: "Carlos O'Donell Jr." To: Thomas Bogendoerfer , parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] SysV IPC structure mismatches Message-ID: <20011016201625.C7269@megatonmonkey.net> References: <20011017012533.A8727@solo.franken.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20011017012533.A8727@solo.franken.de>; from tsbogend@alpha.franken.de on Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 01:25:33AM +0200 List-ID: > > As you might guess going the second way, seems to be the right, because > breaking binary compatibilty now, isn't that big issue, because all the > stuff we have right now, is available in source and easy compilable. > This could change, when there are commercial applications for Linux/Parisc. > But right now, we seem to have a problem building a new glibc (why ?), > so doing it immidiatly isn't that easy. > > I've attached a patch, which implements the first way, which breaks 64bit > kernels. With this patch the nspr testsuite passes all the semaphore tests, > which failed without the change. I could commit that patch, but I believe > it's the wrong way. > > Thomas. > The second way is the best way. "El nuevo" GCC causes broken binary compatibility anyway, so no worries. I think we'll be recompiling all of our applications many times over before we are stable ;) I have the assembly for ld sitting beside me (waiting for my coffee break to trace assembly). If you want to help, you can try to compile glibc-2.2.4-2 for hppa. Having more than one person look at it can be better. The latest glibc for hppa is glibc-2.2.3-8? It seems like a problem in the compiler, since we don't even get to running anything important before it barfs (literally about 60 instructions in _dl_start before an assert fails). What is the problem? Don't know. Looking at assembly in hopes it jumps out. My collection of annotated PA-RISC assembly instructions is helping :} I have glibc compiled with -O1, since IMHO it makes the assembly saner. c.