Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- From: John Reiser <jreiser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 12:21:34 -0800
> On the other hand, the strace output is really strange. First there is a
> clone(...) entry where the process is created with some PID (the return
> value). The next line referring to that particular process is SIGSEGV.
> As if the process did nothing (at least no syscalls) in the meantime.
Fedora Core 1 shipped with kernel-2.4.22-1.2115.nptl;
all Fedora Core kernels are NPTL kernels.
Check the widespread mirror sites for Fedora Core, in
the directory core/<n>/i386/os/Fedora/RPMS/ .
> All I know is that
> I took libc and libpthread over from Fedora 4, and I am running RedHat
> 7.3 but with a 2.4.26 kernel from kernel.org.
glibc+libpthread from Fedora 4 assumes >= kernel-2.6.11-1.1369_FC4,
a kernel which supports a mature NPTL. The immediate SIGSEGV under
kernel-2.4.26 probably is because the kernel does not fully support
some aspect that glibc uses.
> Does Fedora 2 already use 2.6 kernels?
FC2 began with kernel-2.6.5-1.358.
--
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- From: Paul Pluzhnikov
- Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- From: Denes Molnar
- Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- References:
- Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- From: Denes Molnar
- Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- Prev by Date: Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- Next by Date: Re: -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 where to put it in a make project ?
- Previous by thread: Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- Next by thread: Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
