[Glibc-bsd-devel] GNU/kFreeBSD status

[Robert Millan]

On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 12:34:48PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> > 
> > It's obvious now that the error is in the parameter we've been passing to
> > SYS_break. On Glibc, getting the break address from sbrk(0) or the internal
> > symbol __curbrk is equivalent, since sbrk(0) reads it from __curbrk. The
> > result is that __curbrk contains the wrong address. The bug we're looking for
> > might be in the process initialisation routines.
> 
> That sounds reasonable.

Update: I just discovered that staticaly linked executables don't suffer
from this bug. For what I can tell, this leaves us with ld.so.1 as the only
placeholder for the bug (anyone can second that?).

> Hmm. Well, if it's ok with the glibc maintainers, I'd probably just
> have glibc package include two copies of ld.so. Consider that a feature
> specific to freebsd-i386.

If ld has an incorrect sanity check, we should disable it.

-- 
Robert Millan

"[..] but the delight and pride of Aule is in the deed of making, and in the
thing made, and neither in possession nor in his own mastery; wherefore he
gives and hoards not, and is free from care, passing ever on to some new work."

 -- J.R.R.T., Ainulindale (Silmarillion)