Sergey Bugaev, le dim. 28 mai 2023 13:32:12 +0300, a ecrit: > Hello! > > On Sun, May 28, 2023 at 12:13 AM Samuel Thibault > <samuel.thiba...@gnu.org> wrote: > > > task /bin/bash(1) decreasing a bogus port 82650 by 1, most probably a bug. > > > bash: ../sysdeps/mach/hurd/mig-reply.c:84: __mig_dealloc_reply_port: > > > Unexpected error: (os/kern) invalid name. > > > > > > the console warning is expected, we get the same with hurd-i386. But the > > > bash port deallocation is bogus indeed. > > I commented the assert for now, and got a shell :D > > You mean interactive bash works? \o/
Yes. > And -- I assume you're using the full Hurd console? No, I'm just on the mach console, for the debootstrap --second-stage step. > The port error is interesting; 82650 is clearly not a port name, so > it's not a port use-after-free / double free, it's some bad/invalid > memory. Hmm. Is something overwriting our TCB? That could be. That could also explain the issues I'm getting with stack protection. > Do you think this is happening after running a signal / RPC > interruption? Or after a timeout? Is there any easy way to reproduce > this? You can trap on the mach_port_deallocate warning case, or even in kdb by setting mach_port_deallocate_debug to TRUE. > It all "just works" nicely on a full distro, GDB even loads (or > down-loads, with debuginfod) We'll probably want to port gdb soon. > What was the failing stack protector on, this time? It makes sense > that thread_set_state needs to be built without a stack protector, > compared to i386, because we now use it in early startup, whereas we > didn't on i386 -- but what could be a x86_64-specific issue with lwip? ATM I'm seeing various issues, like __dir_lookup telling me it got its stack smashed. Which probably rather means that the stack_guard gets overwritten somehow. We can however defer fixing that to after we get a base system that can build glibc itself, so we can just run the glibc testsuite and fix tests as they go. > On Sun, May 28, 2023 at 5:20 AM Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@gnu.org> > wrote: > > If people want to play with it, I have updated the image on > > > > https://people.debian.org/~sthibault/hurd-i386/initrd-amd64.img.gz > > > > of course, since the second stage of debootstrap doesn't work yet, > > nothing is configured, so you have to configure everything by hand to > > get almost anything to work. It has various .deb packages available in > > /var/cache/apt/archives that can be unpacked with dpkg -i > > Cool, thanks, I'll check it out -- and awesome work all around :) > > More questions: has there been any news on getting official hurd-amd64 > Debian packages? The hurd-amd64 repo is open on debian-ports. I'm waiting for an actual ABI stabilization before uploading packages there, and a working build system before asking for wanna-build and run the buildd. > And on that note, any news about the Rust GSoC project? Wasn't there > supposed to be a community bonding period? It started, yes. Vedant found most of its way already thanks to wiki/faqs etc. > Also, what do we do about [1][2]? > > [1]: https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-hurd/2023-05/msg00287.html > [2]: https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-hurd/2023-05/msg00288.html That's basically part of the ABI step mentioned above :) If people could help with reviewing the changes, that'd spare me time... Samuel