Processed: reassign 173082 to glibc
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reassign 173082 glibc Bug#173082: libnss-db_2.2-6.1(hppa/unstable): FTBFS: assumes __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT is int Bug reassigned from package `libnss-db' to `glibc'. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#173082: libnss-db's libc-lock.h
#if __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT == 0
# define __libc_lock_define_initialized(CLASS,NAME) \
CLASS pthread_mutex_t NAME;
#else
# define __libc_lock_define_initialized(CLASS,NAME) \
CLASS pthread_mutex_t NAME = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
#endif
On hppa, __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT is defined as:
#define __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT ((__atomic_lock_t){ 1 })
So, either the libc pthreads patch needs to change, or the libc-lock.h header
needs to be updated to work with hppa's value of __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT ...
The latter I would guess.
--
Debian - http://www.debian.org/
Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/
Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/
Deqo - http://www.deqo.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#173082: libnss-db's libc-lock.h
On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 10:51:34AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: Glibc defines __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT on HPPA as 1. Another constant hods the initializer; __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT is a predicate. That's really fucking stupid. Nothing in that name indicates to me it should be used as a predicate. And it wasn't when I originally defined it, it was (as its name implies) the value to initialise a spinlock to. Call it __LT_MUTEX_INITIALISER_NEEDED or __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT_P or something. -- It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies. Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject? -- Robert Fisk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#173082: libnss-db's libc-lock.h
On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 10:18:21AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
#if __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT == 0
# define __libc_lock_define_initialized(CLASS,NAME) \
CLASS pthread_mutex_t NAME;
#else
# define __libc_lock_define_initialized(CLASS,NAME) \
CLASS pthread_mutex_t NAME = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
#endif
On hppa, __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT is defined as:
#define __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT ((__atomic_lock_t){ 1 })
So, either the libc pthreads patch needs to change, or the libc-lock.h header
needs to be updated to work with hppa's value of __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT ...
The latter I would guess.
Glibc defines __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT on HPPA as 1. Another constant hods
the initializer; __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT is a predicate.
Carlos has since changed that in his HPPA patches for linuxthreads,
which haven't been accepted upstream, because they didn't like how he
was doing it, I think.
All libnss-db needs to do is remove the first half of the #if. This
isn't a bug in glibc, since that's a private copy of libc-lock.h.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#173082: libnss-db's libc-lock.h
That's really fucking stupid. Nothing in that name indicates to me it should be used as a predicate. And it wasn't when I originally defined it, it was (as its name implies) the value to initialise a spinlock to. Call it __LT_MUTEX_INITIALISER_NEEDED or __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT_P or something. Willy doesn't remember, but he already implemented a fix for this a while back. Under hppa we have __LT_INITIALIZER_NOT_ZERO and replace the #if's with #ifdef's. New patches will be coming this evening to fix libnss-db. John David Anglin an myself have been working on a new set of glibc pthreads patches that use MALLOC_ALIGNMENT=8, and self-aligning locks so we don't have to rely on special alignment requirements from gcc. Those will hopefully be part of the changes in the next patch set, which will again be submitted upstream. The new patches have shown less failures in gcc's testsuite. Glibc specific hppa issues can be directed to me :) c. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#173082: libnss-db's libc-lock.h
On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 09:42:20PM -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote: New patches will be coming this evening to fix libnss-db. Plunk it in at libnss-db-2.2/debian/patches/004_hppa_libc-lock.diff - Builds libnss-db-2.2 - Haven't tested the built package, but the patch is trivial. I'm not a DD yet so I can't push this forward, would someone please do me the honour? :) [Ben, I suggest a build dep on a recent glibc to go with this patch.] -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#173082: libnss-db's libc-lock.h
New patches will be coming this evening to fix libnss-db. Plunk it in at libnss-db-2.2/debian/patches/004_hppa_libc-lock.diff - Builds libnss-db-2.2 - Haven't tested the built package, but the patch is trivial. I'm not a DD yet so I can't push this forward, would someone please do me the honour? :) c. --- nss_db-2.2/libc-lock.h 2003-02-10 21:08:33.0 -0500 +++ nss_db-2.2/libc-lock.h 2003-02-10 21:09:53.0 -0500 @@ -26,12 +26,12 @@ typedef pthread_mutex_t __libc_lock_t; -#if __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT == 0 +#ifdef __LT_INITIALIZER_NOT_ZERO # define __libc_lock_define_initialized(CLASS,NAME) \ - CLASS pthread_mutex_t NAME; + CLASS pthread_mutex_t NAME = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER; #else # define __libc_lock_define_initialized(CLASS,NAME) \ - CLASS pthread_mutex_t NAME = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER; + CLASS pthread_mutex_t NAME; #endif /* Lock the named lock variable. */
