Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 09:59:26 +0200 From: Dirk-Willem van Gulik <dirkx@webweaving.org> To: Kevin Day <toasty@dragondata.com> Cc: Xin Li <delphij@delphij.net>, d@delphij.net, "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Hackers" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Puppet Master <pmaster@mindslayer.net> Subject: Re: FoxPro on FreeBSD Message-ID: <36B00CF4-E8C5-4339-8A35-148F5E707353@webweaving.org> In-Reply-To: <8A799DDB-3D5C-4418-B064-A2B7821EE0F2@dragondata.com> References: <52687ED8.6080309@mindslayer.net> <9B89077C-6BE7-49F1-9F22-19FAD9F6C3ED@dragondata.com> <5268B62B.3000104@delphij.net> <8A799DDB-3D5C-4418-B064-A2B7821EE0F2@dragondata.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 24 Oct 2013, at 08:37, Kevin Day <toasty@dragondata.com> wrote: > On Oct 24, 2013, at 12:54 AM, Xin Li <delphij@delphij.net> wrote: >=20 >> On 10/23/13, 8:32 PM, Kevin Day wrote: >>> I did some debugging, and watched how the process was getting >>> launched, and I've managed to get it to load! >>>=20 >>> The problem was that COFF files expect to be mapped into memory at >>> address 0, something that processes are no longer allowed to do. ... > Nothing is returning any errors, but the .text session isn=92t getting = mapped to the desired location (0x0). If map_at_zero is set to 0, the = process=92s vm_map has min_offset set to PAGE_SIZE instead of 0.=20 ... > Also to clarify my original posting, COFF itself isn=92t the issue = here, just that this specific binary wants its .text section to begin at = a virtual address below 0x1000.=20 Thanks for getting to the bottom of this - may be good to indeed make = the error a lot more human readable - I had the same issue with an old = modified RSA BSafe library - and spend ages looking in the wrong place = for that sigfault. Dw.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?36B00CF4-E8C5-4339-8A35-148F5E707353>