Comment 14 for bug 19828

Message-ID: <20050614031525.GC1623@frodo>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 13:15:25 +1000
From: Nathan Scott <email address hidden>
To: Steve Langasek <email address hidden>
Cc: Jonathan David Amery <email address hidden>, <email address hidden>,
 <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#312936: Programmes linked against libacl1 segfault in libacl1 code.

--U+BazGySraz5kW0T
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 07:56:13PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 11:58:02AM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > Anything specific you're looking for there Steve?
>=20
> + arm: upgrade doesn't work with 2.2, but can work with 2.4.24 or above.
> (perhaps also with older versions, currently unknown)
> (details: glibc vs kernel, source: kylem, tested on netwinder)
> [*]
>=20
> > I know the ACL kernel patches fairly well, and nothing has changed for
> > years now so I'd be surprised if a kernel upgrade changed anything.
>=20
> On the contrary, libacl works sanely on kernels lacking any ACL kernel
> support whatsoever -- this architecture-specific failure more likely poin=
ts
> to a kernel ABI issue specific to ARM.

Hmmm, it was interesting that a libacl recompile made the problem
go away though, that seemed to me to point toward a compiler type
issue rather than a kernel/glibc issue.

cheers.

--=20
Nathan

--U+BazGySraz5kW0T
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCrkvNm8fl3HSIa2MRAl5xAJ4pw9Q0tpfRjrsoaGDIWswRI7EMmACgrvhy
6CNZXBHYvSH3q7SkIU1a98k=
=0ZPU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--U+BazGySraz5kW0T--