From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.11] helo=sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1C6a3T-0006fM-Pj for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 12 Sep 2004 12:30:31 -0700 Received: from smtp003.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.11.34]) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C6a3T-00083T-1S for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 12 Sep 2004 12:30:31 -0700 From: BlaisorBlade Subject: Re: [uml-devel] glibc and NPTL, problem, workarounds, etc. References: <200409122020.51479.blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> <20040912190258.GA7818@taniwha.stupidest.org> In-Reply-To: <20040912190258.GA7818@taniwha.stupidest.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200409122127.12738.blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 21:27:12 +0200 To: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Chris Wedgwood , William Stearns On Sunday 12 September 2004 21:02, Chris Wedgwood wrote: > On Sun, Sep 12, 2004 at 08:20:51PM +0200, BlaisorBlade wrote: > > There is another patch which should make the work - (I never tested > > it, but it should work). Basically, uname will state it is a "i586" > > rather than "i686", > > so NPTL is not enabled: > > http://www.suse.de/~kraxel/uml/patches/uml-pretend-to-be-i586 > This apparently only works because people[1] ship either i386 or i686 > libc and only the latter has NPTL support --- but there is nothing > preventing i586 NPTL support in the future... Are you sure? I remember that NPTL needs using some new instructions of i686 (maybe CMOVxx) for futexes, to be atomic. However, if I'm wrong, we could even pretend to be i386. > --cw > [1] RH & Debian checked, maybe this isn't true for gentoo in which > case it will break there? Well, you compile Gentoo for your own processor - you might maybe even enable -mregparm for everything (which even breaks binary compatibility everything). I guess if you build Gentoo on an i386, it will either refuse to build or build an i386 glibc. Otherwise, it does not make sense for them to ship i386 glibc. That said, you must just be careful when building the guest root_fs, with Gentoo. -- Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade Linux registered user n. 292729 ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 13. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel