Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 29 Oct 2003 14:38:33 -0800
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: __fpclassifyd problem
Message-ID:  <20031029223833.GA13129@rot13.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <20031029152202.C7702@pooker.samsco.home>
References:  <3F92E129.10307@veidit.net> <20031028034630.GC32916@VARK.homeunix.com> <20031028090337.E27950@carver.gumbysoft.com> <3FA01F71.1020203@adminforum.se> <20031029211951.GA12398@rot13.obsecurity.org> <20031029152202.C7702@pooker.samsco.home>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 03:28:32PM -0700, Scott Long wrote:

> I just tried running the Diablo JDK under -current from yesterday (with
> the libm fix from a few days ago).  It does not look good; possibly an
> issue with both the compat libc and native libc being linked in?  Maybe
> libm.so is still bringing in the native libc.so?  We don't install the
> 4.x libm into compat, and I don't have any 4.x machine around to steal it
> from, so I can't test out that theory.

The binary is linked to:

/usr/lib/libm.so.2
/usr/lib/compat/libc.so.4
(and others)

(recall: the source of the libm problems was that libc.so.5 was *not*
linked in).  I'm not sure why gdb says otherwise - perhaps it's
confused about the library paths.

Perhaps there's some kind of ABI problem here that java is choking on.

Kris
--gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/oEFoWry0BWjoQKURAmyEAJ0QuHS/l/cV2WZB9XyRwZHJN83iYwCghMaN
F5lFzz/j9tKAm6HBwEPwqk4=
=zhAt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031029223833.GA13129>