From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Unable to fork off sideband demultiplexer Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 10:49:07 -0400 Message-ID: <20110603144907.GA11273@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <7vk4d5h3qt.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20110601173524.GF7132@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20110602192927.GA21262@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Brandon Casey , git@vger.kernel.org To: Randy Brandenburg X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jun 03 16:49:19 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QSVgc-0003ES-ES for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 16:49:18 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751928Ab1FCOtN (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jun 2011 10:49:13 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:54046 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751693Ab1FCOtM (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jun 2011 10:49:12 -0400 Received: (qmail 8537 invoked by uid 107); 3 Jun 2011 14:49:15 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 10:49:15 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 03 Jun 2011 10:49:07 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 01:30:00PM +0000, Randy Brandenburg wrote: > > If you build without NO_PTHREADS set on a Solaris 9 box, does it > > work on that same box? That would confirm or deny my ABI > > compatibility theory (and hopefully point us in the right direction > > for the sunfreeware people to build a binary that works on Solaris 9 > > and 10). > > > > Building without NO_PTHREADS set results in the original "broken" > behaviour. I am staying with the working version in the interest of > time. May investigate more later. Thanks, that's a good data point. I know you are probably out of time for fooling with such things, but if you get a chance, could you try building also with "-pthreads" in PTHREAD_CFLAGS? I'm wondering if the problem is as simple as that. -Peff