Re: linux compatability broken
In the last episode (Jul 25), Eric Dedrick said: > > Just to clarify, I mean that using portupgrade will (hopefully, and > > in my experience, almost always) take care of your dependencies > > during the upgrade process, thus saving you from the IMO less > > preferable alternative of running more than one version of a port. > > > > Have you tried portupgrade with linux_base (after a backup of the > > old linux_base port skeleton and installation of the new one) to > > see whether Maple is happy? > > Yup. portupgrading eliminates ld-linux.so.1, required by maple. > Thanks for the suggestion, though. Hm. It shouldn't, since linux_base and linux_base-6 are different ports. Unless you had the RH6 version of linux_base, then installed linux_base-6, then upgraded linux_base to the RH7 version. The upgrade of linux_base would have effectively wiped out the linux_base-6 install. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
> Just to clarify, I mean that using portupgrade will > (hopefully, and in my experience, almost always) take > care of your dependencies during the upgrade process, > thus saving you from the IMO less preferable > alternative of running more than one version of a > port. > > Have you tried portupgrade with linux_base (after a > backup of the old linux_base port skeleton and > installation of the new one) to see whether Maple > is happy? Yup. portupgrading eliminates ld-linux.so.1, required by maple. Thanks for the suggestion, though. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
-Original Message- From: Eric Dedrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Jud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 10:58:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: linux compatability broken > I changed from 6 to 7.1 when -STABLE did using portupgrade, and > managed not to break anything in the system, including Opera and > Acrobat5. Don't know whether it was just dumb luck, but as a general > cure for running two versions of any port, especially linux_base, I tend > to favor it. Yeah, and were it not for Maple's explicit complaints about wanting ld-linux.so.1 I might be in good shape. As for installing both, I get tons of complaints when installing off the ports because 6 and 7.1 have different versions of glibc and then the ports makefile quits: [snip] So it would seem communicator-4.79 is branded svr4 by default from the ports, it will not execute under linux_base7.1 branded as either svr4 or linux. It will run under linux_base6 with either svr4 or linux brands if svr4.ko is unloaded, but must be branded linux if svr4.ko is loaded. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Just to clarify, I mean that using portupgrade will (hopefully, and in my experience, almost always) take care of your dependencies during the upgrade process, thus saving you from the IMO less preferable alternative of running more than one version of a port. Have you tried portupgrade with linux_base (after a backup of the old linux_base port skeleton and installation of the new one) to see whether Maple is happy? RE the svr4 stuff, that is way beyond my ken - I'll happily leave it to you and Mr. Nelson. :) Jud To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
> I changed from 6 to 7.1 when -STABLE did using portupgrade, and > managed not to break anything in the system, including Opera and > Acrobat5. Don't know whether it was just dumb luck, but as a general > cure for running two versions of any port, especially linux_base, I tend > to favor it. Yeah, and were it not for Maple's explicit complaints about wanting ld-linux.so.1 I might be in good shape. As for installing both, I get tons of complaints when installing off the ports because 6 and 7.1 have different versions of glibc and then the ports makefile quits: file /usr/bin/catchsegv from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 (apparently 6 uses 2.1.2-11 and 7.1 uses 2.1.2-10. Should I change that to 2.1.2-11 in linux_base's makefile?) I just installed netscape-4.79 off the ports. Let's do a little test: So here we have linux_base7.1. $ file /usr/local/lib/netscape-linux/communicator-linux-4.79.bin /usr/local/lib/netscape-linux/communicator-linux-4.79.bin: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped $ netscape communicator-linux-4.79.bin: locale `C' not supported. Perhaps the $XNLSPATH environment variable is not set correctly? No plugin Citrix ICA Client. Reverting to save-to-disk for type application/x-ica. Bus error (core dumped) $ brandelf -t Linux /usr/local/lib/netscape-linux/communicator-linux-4.79.bin $ file /usr/local/lib/netscape-linux/communicator-linux-4.79.bin /usr/local/lib/netscape-linux/communicator-linux-4.79.bin: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (GNU/Linux), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped $ netscape communicator-linux-4.79.bin: locale `C' not supported. Perhaps the $XNLSPATH environment variable is not set correctly? No plugin Citrix ICA Client. Reverting to save-to-disk for type application/x-ica. Bus error (core dumped) # cd /usr/ports/emulators/linux_base; make deinstall ===> Deinstalling for linux_base-7.1 # cd /usr/ports/emulators/linux_base-6; make install (stuff) ===> Registering installation for linux_base-6.1_1 $ netscape No plugin Citrix ICA Client. Reverting to save-to-disk for type application/x-ica. --Executes perfectly. # brandelf -t SVR4 /usr/local/lib/netscape-linux/communicator-linux-4.79.bin $ file /usr/local/lib/netscape-linux/communicator-linux-4.79.bin /usr/local/lib/netscape-linux/communicator-linux-4.79.bin: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped $ netscape No plugin Citrix ICA Client. Reverting to save-to-disk for type application/x-ica. --Executes perfectly. # kldload svr4.ko $ netscape ELF interpreter /compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2 not found Abort trap # brandelf -t Linux /usr/local/lib/netscape-linux/communicator-linux-4.79.bin $ netscape No plugin Citrix ICA Client. Reverting to save-to-disk for type application/x-ica. --Executes perfectly So it would seem communicator-4.79 is branded svr4 by default from the ports, it will not execute under linux_base7.1 branded as either svr4 or linux. It will run under linux_base6 with either svr4 or linux brands if svr4.ko is unloaded, but must be branded linux if svr4.ko is loaded. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
7/25/2002 12:49:49 AM, Dan Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >In the last episode (Jul 24), Eric Dedrick said: >> Okay, we got it. I had to run linux_base-6 and *not* any type of >> linux_base (7.1) whatsoever. >> >> Since it would appear that running linux_base-6 and linux_base(7.1) are >> mutually exclusive (after all, they run non-compatable versions of glibc), >> here's a question: I have some software I can't upgrade (proprietary) >> that requires linux_base-6. If I install linux software from the ports, >> is it going to require linux_base 7.1? > >You should be able to install both ports at once. > >> Here was the hangup: In order to install linux_base-6, svr4.ko had to be >> unloaded from the kernel. Once linux_base-6 was installed, svr4.ko could >> be loaded again and things still worked just fine. At least that's what I >> think the solution was. >> >> At any rate, I can run my linux binaries now, though I am still somewhat >> dis-satisfied. Why do things break under 7.1 and not 6? > >Dunno. It looks like all your linux binaries got branded to the wrong >type (svr4 instead of Linux), so the svr4 layer grabbed them first if >it was loaded. Try this: > >find /compat/linux -type f -perm +a+x -ls | xargs brandelf -t Linux > >, which should rebrand all the Linux binaries to Linux. It shouldn't >be necessary though. > >-- > Dan Nelson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] I changed from 6 to 7.1 when -STABLE did using portupgrade, and managed not to break anything in the system, including Opera and Acrobat5. Don't know whether it was just dumb luck, but as a general cure for running two versions of any port, especially linux_base, I tend to favor it. Jud To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
In the last episode (Jul 24), Eric Dedrick said: > Okay, we got it. I had to run linux_base-6 and *not* any type of > linux_base (7.1) whatsoever. > > Since it would appear that running linux_base-6 and linux_base(7.1) are > mutually exclusive (after all, they run non-compatable versions of glibc), > here's a question: I have some software I can't upgrade (proprietary) > that requires linux_base-6. If I install linux software from the ports, > is it going to require linux_base 7.1? You should be able to install both ports at once. > Here was the hangup: In order to install linux_base-6, svr4.ko had to be > unloaded from the kernel. Once linux_base-6 was installed, svr4.ko could > be loaded again and things still worked just fine. At least that's what I > think the solution was. > > At any rate, I can run my linux binaries now, though I am still somewhat > dis-satisfied. Why do things break under 7.1 and not 6? Dunno. It looks like all your linux binaries got branded to the wrong type (svr4 instead of Linux), so the svr4 layer grabbed them first if it was loaded. Try this: find /compat/linux -type f -perm +a+x -ls | xargs brandelf -t Linux , which should rebrand all the Linux binaries to Linux. It shouldn't be necessary though. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
I'm only partly correct in what I mentioned earlier. I still have some programs (like mozilla) wanting /compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (which again begs the question why we're looking for ld-linux.so.2 in the svr4 dir instead of the linux dir). when svr4.ko is loaded and complaining about lacking libgtk-1.2.so.0 when svr4,ko is unloaded. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
Okay, we got it. I had to run linux_base-6 and *not* any type of linux_base (7.1) whatsoever. Since it would appear that running linux_base-6 and linux_base(7.1) are mutually exclusive (after all, they run non-compatable versions of glibc), here's a question: I have some software I can't upgrade (proprietary) that requires linux_base-6. If I install linux software from the ports, is it going to require linux_base 7.1? Here was the hangup: In order to install linux_base-6, svr4.ko had to be unloaded from the kernel. Once linux_base-6 was installed, svr4.ko could be loaded again and things still worked just fine. At least that's what I think the solution was. At any rate, I can run my linux binaries now, though I am still somewhat dis-satisfied. Why do things break under 7.1 and not 6? Again, thanks for the help guys. On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Dan Nelson wrote: > In the last episode (Jul 24), Eric Dedrick said: > > > Getting a bit better, but now it looks like it thinks the binary is a > > > native BSD one instead of Linux. If you run "file > > > /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static", what does it print? > > > > $ file /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static > > /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static: ELF 32-bit LSB > > executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared > > libs), stripped > > Try running "brandelf -t Linux /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static" > and see what happens, or sysctl kern.fallback_elf_brand=3 > > -- > Dan Nelson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
In the last episode (Jul 24), Eric Dedrick said: > > Getting a bit better, but now it looks like it thinks the binary is a > > native BSD one instead of Linux. If you run "file > > /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static", what does it print? > > $ file /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static > /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static: ELF 32-bit LSB > executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared > libs), stripped Try running "brandelf -t Linux /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static" and see what happens, or sysctl kern.fallback_elf_brand=3 -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
> Getting a bit better, but now it looks like it thinks the binary is a > native BSD one instead of Linux. If you run "file > /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static", what does it print? $ file /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
In the last episode (Jul 24), Eric Dedrick said: > > > $ opera > > > ELF interpreter /compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2 not found > > > [1] 11964 Abort trap > > > > Now that's really confusing. Without the svr4 module loaded, the > > string "/compat/svr4" should not exist anywhere in the kernel (it's > > defined in /sys/svr4/svr4_sysvec.c). There is simply no way you should > > get that error message. Are you _sure_ you're booting a rebuilt > > kernel? Try rm -rf'ing the compile directory and build again. What > > does 'uname -v' print? > $ uname -v > FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE #4: Tue Jul 23 21:13:42 EST 2002 >[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/DSL-146-127-2 > > I've also unloaded the svr4.ko module and when I do that I get a whole new > realm of complaints. Mostly a whole bunch of libraries that can't be > found. Instead of > [1] 21021 Bad system call (core dumped) > we get > /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static: error while loading > shared libraries: libjpeg.so.62: cannot load shared object file: No such > file or directory Getting a bit better, but now it looks like it thinks the binary is a native BSD one instead of Linux. If you run "file /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static", what does it print? > There are also a whole bunch of other libraries missing from > /compat/linux. Some programs want ld-linux.so.1, and another wants > libdl.so.1. None of these exist in /compat with the linux-7.1 install. If you need to run RH 6 binaries, you'll need to also install the linux_base-6 package. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
> > $ opera > > ELF interpreter /compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2 not found > > [1] 11964 Abort trap > > Now that's really confusing. Without the svr4 module loaded, the > string "/compat/svr4" should not exist anywhere in the kernel (it's > defined in /sys/svr4/svr4_sysvec.c). There is simply no way you should > get that error message. Are you _sure_ you're booting a rebuilt > kernel? Try rm -rf'ing the compile directory and build again. What > does 'uname -v' print? I am totally sure that I have a new kernel. I did it with the make world, make buildkernel KERNCONF=xxx; make installkernel KERNCONF=xxx; make installworld sequence followed by mergemaster to get the /etc files right. Let's see $ uname -v FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE #4: Tue Jul 23 21:13:42 EST 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/DSL-146-127-2 That looks like a pretty recent kernel to me. $ kldstat Id Refs AddressSize Name 15 0xc010 238690 kernel 21 0xc0944000 2000 green_saver.ko 31 0xc0947000 14000linux.ko 41 0xc0974000 3000 streams.ko 51 0xc0977000 11000svr4.ko I've also unloaded the svr4.ko module and when I do that I get a whole new realm of complaints. Mostly a whole bunch of libraries that can't be found. Instead of [1] 21021 Bad system call (core dumped) we get /usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static: error while loading shared libraries: libjpeg.so.62: cannot load shared object file: No such file or directory There are also a whole bunch of other libraries missing from /compat/linux. Some programs want ld-linux.so.1, and another wants libdl.so.1. None of these exist in /compat with the linux-7.1 install. Still, the nature of the problems changed. Maybe I can't run svr4 and linux at the same time? (I've only used svr4 compatability a couple times anyway.) A bug like that would explain some of the odd behaviour. But what should I do about the libraries missing from linux 7.1, like ld-linux.so.1 and stuff? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
In the last episode (Jul 24), Eric Dedrick said: > > If you don't load the svr4 module (and don't have options COMPAT_SVR4 > > in your config file), it shouldn't look in /compat/svr4. Try removing > > those and see what happens. > > > > Symlinking /compat/svr4 to /compat/linux won't do a thing, since the > > syscalls don't match. > > I get: > > $ opera > ELF interpreter /compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2 not found > [1] 11964 Abort trap Now that's really confusing. Without the svr4 module loaded, the string "/compat/svr4" should not exist anywhere in the kernel (it's defined in /sys/svr4/svr4_sysvec.c). There is simply no way you should get that error message. Are you _sure_ you're booting a rebuilt kernel? Try rm -rf'ing the compile directory and build again. What does 'uname -v' print? -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken
> If you don't load the svr4 module (and don't have options COMPAT_SVR4 > in your config file), it shouldn't look in /compat/svr4. Try removing > those and see what happens. > > Symlinking /compat/svr4 to /compat/linux won't do a thing, since the > syscalls don't match. I get: $ opera ELF interpreter /compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2 not found [1] 11964 Abort trap To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
In the last episode (Jul 24), Eric Dedrick said: > > 11590 ktrace NAMI "/compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2" > > > > Why does it think the binary is an svr4 binary? That's why the > > syscalls still don't match and you get SIGSYS after a while. > > Something sounds really out of sync. > > That's kind of what I thought. I tried re-brandelf'ing my version of > netscape just to make sure it was doing linux and not svr4, and it > just complained about something else. I also don't think that > linux-netscape is elf format. I don't know that one can brand file > types other than elf. Besides, it worked fine before, the brand on > these linux files is what it should be I assume. If you don't load the svr4 module (and don't have options COMPAT_SVR4 in your config file), it shouldn't look in /compat/svr4. Try removing those and see what happens. Symlinking /compat/svr4 to /compat/linux won't do a thing, since the syscalls don't match. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
> but then it's looking for /usr/compat/linux/lib/lib/ld-linux.so.2 > > make /compat/svr4 -> /compat/linux No change. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
but then it's looking for /usr/compat/linux/lib/lib/ld-linux.so.2 make /compat/svr4 -> /compat/linux -Adam >> (07.24.2002 @ 1217 PST): Eric Dedrick said, in 0.3K: << > > uhmm you can always kludge by ln -s /compat/linux /compat/svr4 ::) > > > > just curious... do you have anything in /compat/svr4? > > A symbolic link to /usr/compat/linux/lib. > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > >> end of "Re: linux compatability broken?" from Eric Dedrick << -- "Oh good, my dog found the chainsaw." -Lilo, "Lilo & Stitch" Adam Weinberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://vectors.cx To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
> uhmm you can always kludge by ln -s /compat/linux /compat/svr4 ::) > > just curious... do you have anything in /compat/svr4? A symbolic link to /usr/compat/linux/lib. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
> 11590 ktrace NAMI "/compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2" > > Why does it think the binary is an svr4 binary? That's why the > syscalls still don't match and you get SIGSYS after a while. Something > sounds really out of sync. That's kind of what I thought. I tried re-brandelf'ing my version of netscape just to make sure it was doing linux and not svr4, and it just complained about something else. I also don't think that linux-netscape is elf format. I don't know that one can brand file types other than elf. Besides, it worked fine before, the brand on these linux files is what it should be I assume. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
uhmm you can always kludge by ln -s /compat/linux /compat/svr4 ::) just curious... do you have anything in /compat/svr4? -Adam >> (07.24.2002 @ 1210 PST): Eric Dedrick said, in 0.6K: << > > oh wow i didn't notice that one. > > > > run /compat/linux/sbin/ldconfig -p and see where it's looking for > > ld-linux.so.2. the line should be something like: > > ld-linux.so.2 (ELF) => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 > > > > but yeah, rebuild that kernel and modules! > > I've rebuilt them so many times figuring that was the problem that I'm > getting kind of sick of it. Everything is fresh. The whole kernel and OS > is what was on CVS stable as of about noon yesterday. Unless there is a > patch or something that's not going to do any good. > > $ /compat/linux/sbin/ldconfig -p > (other suff)... > ld-linux.so.2 (ELF) => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 > > >> end of "Re: linux compatability broken?" from Eric Dedrick << -- "Oh good, my dog found the chainsaw." -Lilo, "Lilo & Stitch" Adam Weinberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://vectors.cx To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
> oh wow i didn't notice that one. > > run /compat/linux/sbin/ldconfig -p and see where it's looking for > ld-linux.so.2. the line should be something like: > ld-linux.so.2 (ELF) => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 > > but yeah, rebuild that kernel and modules! I've rebuilt them so many times figuring that was the problem that I'm getting kind of sick of it. Everything is fresh. The whole kernel and OS is what was on CVS stable as of about noon yesterday. Unless there is a patch or something that's not going to do any good. $ /compat/linux/sbin/ldconfig -p (other suff)... ld-linux.so.2 (ELF) => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
oh wow i didn't notice that one. run /compat/linux/sbin/ldconfig -p and see where it's looking for ld-linux.so.2. the line should be something like: ld-linux.so.2 (ELF) => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 but yeah, rebuild that kernel and modules! -Adam >> (07.24.2002 @ 1143 PST): Dan Nelson said, in 0.5K: << > In the last episode (Jul 24), Eric Dedrick said: > > Yup. See the new attachements. Again, thank you so much for the help. > > 11590 ktrace NAMI "/compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2" > > Why does it think the binary is an svr4 binary? That's why the > syscalls still don't match and you get SIGSYS after a while. Something > sounds really out of sync. Try rebuilding your kernel and modules, and > make sure they install into the right places. > > -- > Dan Nelson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> end of "Re: linux compatability broken?" from Dan Nelson << -- "Oh good, my dog found the chainsaw." -Lilo, "Lilo & Stitch" Adam Weinberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://vectors.cx To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
In the last episode (Jul 24), Eric Dedrick said: > Yup. See the new attachements. Again, thank you so much for the help. 11590 ktrace NAMI "/compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2" Why does it think the binary is an svr4 binary? That's why the syscalls still don't match and you get SIGSYS after a while. Something sounds really out of sync. Try rebuilding your kernel and modules, and make sure they install into the right places. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
ok. from /usr/src/sys/i386/linux/syscalls.master:
79 NOPROTO LINUX { int settimeofday(struct timeval *tp, \
struct timezone *tzp); }
it's getting passed a memory address, and then 0. what timezone do you
have your system set to?
-Adam
>> (07.24.2002 @ 1127 PST): Eric Dedrick said, in 5.2K: <<
> Yup. See the new attachements. Again, thank you so much for the help.
>
> On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Dan Nelson wrote:
>
> > In the last episode (Jul 24), Eric Dedrick said:
> > > > i'm going to have to ask that anybody else who knows please step in
> > > > here...
> > > >
> > > > to know where it's dying, i'd need to see a kernel trace, isolating the
> > > > system call that it's b0rking on.
> > >
> > > I've attached a couple. Thanks.
> >
> > Try running ktrace -i , then kdump -m128. All you traced here
> > is the shell script, and the trace of opera itself is the more
> > interesting one. Also maybe install the linux_kdump port, and run that
> > instead of regular kdump. The trace of the Linux binary will be more
> > readable that way.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dan Nelson
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> settimeofday(0xbfbff364,0x0,0x0) ERR#9 'Bad file descriptor'
> open("ÆÄþÿÄ",0x286ae113,00) ERR#22 'Invalid argument'
> read(0x286a9657,0x16,0xbfbff4f4) ERR#9 'Bad file descriptor'
> close(22) ERR#9 'Bad file descriptor'
> SIGNAL 12
> SIGNAL 12
> Process stopped because of: 16
> process exit, rval = 140
> 11590 ktrace RET ktrace 0
> 11590 ktrace CALL execve(0xbfbff8be,0xbfbff7d4,0xbfbff7dc)
> 11590 ktrace NAMI "/usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static"
> 11590 ktrace NAMI "/compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2"
> 11590 opera-static RET execve 0
> 11590 opera-static CALL settimeofday(0xbfbff364,0,0)
> 11590 opera-static RET settimeofday -1 errno 9 Bad file descriptor
> 11590 opera-static CALL open(0x286a963a,0x286ae113,0)
> 11590 opera-static RET open -1 errno 22 Invalid argument
> 11590 opera-static CALL read(0x286a9657,0x16,0xbfbff4f4)
> 11590 opera-static RET read -1 errno 9 Bad file descriptor
> 11590 opera-static CALL close(0x16)
> 11590 opera-static RET close -1 errno 9 Bad file descriptor
> 11590 opera-static CALL old.killpg
> 11590 opera-static PSIG SIGSYS SIG_DFL
> 11590 opera-static NAMI "opera-static.core"
> settimeofday(0xbfbff378,0x0,0x0) ERR#9 'Bad file descriptor'
> open("ÆÄþÿÄ",0x28099113,00) ERR#22 'Invalid argument'
> read(0x28094657,0x16,0xbfbff508) ERR#9 'Bad file descriptor'
> close(22) ERR#9 'Bad file descriptor'
> SIGNAL 12
> SIGNAL 12
> Process stopped because of: 16
> process exit, rval = 140
> 11596 ktrace RET ktrace 0
> 11596 ktrace CALL execve(0xbfbff8ce,0xbfbff7e4,0xbfbff7ec)
> 11596 ktrace NAMI "/usr/local/mozilla/mozilla-bin"
> 11596 ktrace NAMI "/compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2"
> 11596 mozilla-bin RET execve 0
> 11596 mozilla-bin CALL settimeofday(0xbfbff378,0,0)
> 11596 mozilla-bin RET settimeofday -1 errno 9 Bad file descriptor
> 11596 mozilla-bin CALL open(0x2809463a,0x28099113,0)
> 11596 mozilla-bin RET open -1 errno 22 Invalid argument
> 11596 mozilla-bin CALL read(0x28094657,0x16,0xbfbff508)
> 11596 mozilla-bin RET read -1 errno 9 Bad file descriptor
> 11596 mozilla-bin CALL close(0x16)
> 11596 mozilla-bin RET close -1 errno 9 Bad file descriptor
> 11596 mozilla-bin CALL old.killpg
> 11596 mozilla-bin PSIG SIGSYS SIG_DFL
> 11596 mozilla-bin NAMI "mozilla-bin.core"
>> end of "Re: linux compatability broken?" from Eric Dedrick <<
--
"Oh good, my dog found the chainsaw."
-Lilo, "Lilo & Stitch"
Adam Weinberger
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://vectors.cx
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
Yup. See the new attachements. Again, thank you so much for the help.
On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Dan Nelson wrote:
> In the last episode (Jul 24), Eric Dedrick said:
> > > i'm going to have to ask that anybody else who knows please step in
> > > here...
> > >
> > > to know where it's dying, i'd need to see a kernel trace, isolating the
> > > system call that it's b0rking on.
> >
> > I've attached a couple. Thanks.
>
> Try running ktrace -i , then kdump -m128. All you traced here
> is the shell script, and the trace of opera itself is the more
> interesting one. Also maybe install the linux_kdump port, and run that
> instead of regular kdump. The trace of the Linux binary will be more
> readable that way.
>
>
> --
> Dan Nelson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
settimeofday(0xbfbff364,0x0,0x0) ERR#9 'Bad file descriptor'
open("ÆÄþÿÄ",0x286ae113,00) ERR#22 'Invalid argument'
read(0x286a9657,0x16,0xbfbff4f4) ERR#9 'Bad file descriptor'
close(22)ERR#9 'Bad file descriptor'
SIGNAL 12
SIGNAL 12
Process stopped because of: 16
process exit, rval = 140
11590 ktrace RET ktrace 0
11590 ktrace CALL execve(0xbfbff8be,0xbfbff7d4,0xbfbff7dc)
11590 ktrace NAMI "/usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static"
11590 ktrace NAMI "/compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2"
11590 opera-static RET execve 0
11590 opera-static CALL settimeofday(0xbfbff364,0,0)
11590 opera-static RET settimeofday -1 errno 9 Bad file descriptor
11590 opera-static CALL open(0x286a963a,0x286ae113,0)
11590 opera-static RET open -1 errno 22 Invalid argument
11590 opera-static CALL read(0x286a9657,0x16,0xbfbff4f4)
11590 opera-static RET read -1 errno 9 Bad file descriptor
11590 opera-static CALL close(0x16)
11590 opera-static RET close -1 errno 9 Bad file descriptor
11590 opera-static CALL old.killpg
11590 opera-static PSIG SIGSYS SIG_DFL
11590 opera-static NAMI "opera-static.core"
settimeofday(0xbfbff378,0x0,0x0) ERR#9 'Bad file descriptor'
open("ÆÄþÿÄ",0x28099113,00) ERR#22 'Invalid argument'
read(0x28094657,0x16,0xbfbff508) ERR#9 'Bad file descriptor'
close(22)ERR#9 'Bad file descriptor'
SIGNAL 12
SIGNAL 12
Process stopped because of: 16
process exit, rval = 140
11596 ktrace RET ktrace 0
11596 ktrace CALL execve(0xbfbff8ce,0xbfbff7e4,0xbfbff7ec)
11596 ktrace NAMI "/usr/local/mozilla/mozilla-bin"
11596 ktrace NAMI "/compat/svr4/lib/ld-linux.so.2"
11596 mozilla-bin RET execve 0
11596 mozilla-bin CALL settimeofday(0xbfbff378,0,0)
11596 mozilla-bin RET settimeofday -1 errno 9 Bad file descriptor
11596 mozilla-bin CALL open(0x2809463a,0x28099113,0)
11596 mozilla-bin RET open -1 errno 22 Invalid argument
11596 mozilla-bin CALL read(0x28094657,0x16,0xbfbff508)
11596 mozilla-bin RET read -1 errno 9 Bad file descriptor
11596 mozilla-bin CALL close(0x16)
11596 mozilla-bin RET close -1 errno 9 Bad file descriptor
11596 mozilla-bin CALL old.killpg
11596 mozilla-bin PSIG SIGSYS SIG_DFL
11596 mozilla-bin NAMI "mozilla-bin.core"
Re: linux compatability broken?
In the last episode (Jul 24), Eric Dedrick said: > > i'm going to have to ask that anybody else who knows please step in > > here... > > > > to know where it's dying, i'd need to see a kernel trace, isolating the > > system call that it's b0rking on. > > I've attached a couple. Thanks. Try running ktrace -i , then kdump -m128. All you traced here is the shell script, and the trace of opera itself is the more interesting one. Also maybe install the linux_kdump port, and run that instead of regular kdump. The trace of the Linux binary will be more readable that way. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
> i'm going to have to ask that anybody else who knows please step in > here... > > to know where it's dying, i'd need to see a kernel trace, isolating the > system call that it's b0rking on. I've attached a couple. Thanks. 11362 ktrace RET ktrace 0 11362 ktrace CALL execve(0xbfbff2f8,0xbfbff800,0xbfbff808) 11362 ktrace NAMI "/home/dedrick/bin/opera" 11362 ktrace RET execve -1 errno 2 No such file or directory 11362 ktrace CALL execve(0xbfbff2f8,0xbfbff800,0xbfbff808) 11362 ktrace NAMI "/usr/local/bin/opera" 11362 ktrace NAMI "/bin/sh" 11362 sh RET execve 0 11362 sh CALL getpid 11362 sh RET getpid 11362/0x2c62 11362 sh CALL geteuid 11362 sh RET geteuid 1000/0x3e8 11362 sh CALL getppid 11362 sh RET getppid 223/0xdf 11362 sh CALL readlink(0x80b0434,0xbfbff598,0x3f) 11362 sh NAMI "/etc/malloc.conf" 11362 sh RET readlink -1 errno 2 No such file or directory 11362 sh CALL mmap(0,0x1000,0x3,0x1002,0x,0,0,0) 11362 sh RET mmap 671813632/0x280b1000 11362 sh CALL break(0x80c2000) 11362 sh RET break 0 11362 sh CALL break(0x80c3000) 11362 sh RET break 0 11362 sh CALL stat(0x80be2a4,0xbfbff668) 11362 sh NAMI "/var/mail/dedrick" 11362 sh RET stat 0 11362 sh CALL getuid 11362 sh RET getuid 1000/0x3e8 11362 sh CALL geteuid 11362 sh RET geteuid 1000/0x3e8 11362 sh CALL getgid 11362 sh RET getgid 1000/0x3e8 11362 sh CALL getegid 11362 sh RET getegid 1000/0x3e8 11362 sh CALL open(0xbfbff8d8,0,0xbfbff708) 11362 sh NAMI "/usr/local/bin/opera" 11362 sh RET open 3 11362 sh CALL fcntl(0x3,0,0xa) 11362 sh RET fcntl 10/0xa 11362 sh CALL close(0x3) 11362 sh RET close 0 11362 sh CALL fcntl(0xa,0x2,0x1) 11362 sh RET fcntl 0 11362 sh CALL sigaction(0x2,0,0xbfbff660) 11362 sh RET sigaction 0 11362 sh CALL sigaction(0x2,0xbfbff660,0xbfbff648) 11362 sh RET sigaction 0 11362 sh CALL sigaction(0x2,0,0xbfbff660) 11362 sh RET sigaction 0 11362 sh CALL sigaction(0x2,0xbfbff660,0) 11362 sh RET sigaction 0 11362 sh CALL sigaction(0x3,0,0xbfbff650) 11362 sh RET sigaction 0 11362 sh CALL sigaction(0x3,0xbfbff650,0xbfbff638) 11362 sh RET sigaction 0 11362 sh CALL sigaction(0x3,0,0xbfbff650) 11362 sh RET sigaction 0 11362 sh CALL sigaction(0x3,0xbfbff650,0) 11362 sh RET sigaction 0 11362 sh CALL sigaction(0xf,0,0xbfbff660) 11362 sh RET sigaction 0 11362 sh CALL sigaction(0xf,0xbfbff660,0xbfbff648) 11362 sh RET sigaction 0 11362 sh CALL sigaction(0xc,0xbfbff4d0,0xbfbff4b8) 11362 sh RET sigaction 0 11362 sh CALL __getcwd(0xbfbff638,0x100) 11362 sh RET __getcwd 0 11362 sh CALL sigaction(0xc,0xbfbff4b8,0) 11362 sh RET sigaction 0 11362 sh CALL read(0xa,0x80bde20,0x3ff) 11362 sh GIO fd 10 read 1023 bytes "#!/bin/sh # Location of the Opera binary OPERA=/usr/local/opera/lib/opera/5.05_tp1/opera-static if test ! -e $OPERA; then echo "The Opera binary is not located at \\"$OPERA\\"." echo "Please modify the wrapper script at \\"$0\\"." exit 1 elif test ! -x $OPERA; then echo "You do not have execute rights on \\"$OPERA\\", please ask t\ he sysadmin to chmod +x it." exit 1 fi # Opera enviroment if test "$OPERA_DIR" = '' ; then if test -d /usr/local/opera/share/opera ; then OPERA_DIR=/usr/local/opera/share/opera else echo "OPERA_DIR unset and not in default location (/usr/share/oper\ a)" exit 1 fi fi # Opera Plug-in enviroment, Add more plugin search paths here # If OPERA_PLUGIN_PATH is set NPX_PLUGIN_PATH will be ignored for DIR in \\ /usr/local/lib/opera/lib/opera/plugins \\ /usr/local/Acrobat3/Browsers/intellinux \\ /usr/local/linux-jdk1.3.1/jre/plugin/i386/ns4 \\ /usr/local/RealPlayer8/Plugins \\ /usr/lib/realplay/plugins \\ /usr/lib/RealPlayer8 \\ "$HOME/" 11362 sh RET read 1023/0x3ff 11362 sh CALL break(0x80c4000) 11362 sh RET break 0 11362 sh CALL break(0x80c5000) 11362 sh RET break 0 11362 sh CALL break(0x80c6000) 11362 sh RET break 0 11362 sh CALL getegid 11362 sh RET getegid 1000/0x3e8 11362 sh CALL geteuid 11362
Re: linux compatability broken?
i'm going to have to ask that anybody else who knows please step in here... to know where it's dying, i'd need to see a kernel trace, isolating the system call that it's b0rking on. have you changed any other options in your kernel? -Adam is it still complaining that it cannot load the so.2? >> (07.23.2002 @ 2237 PST): Eric Dedrick said, in 2.3K: << > Okay, I just installed linux_base 7.1 from the ports and linux > compatability is still broken (everything is failing with "bad system > call" signal 12). linux.ko is loaded, compatability mode enabled. What > do you suggest now? > > On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Adam Weinberger wrote: > > > you have to uninstall the old version of linux_base that you have. if > > you don't know how to do that, you can always: > > > > install /usr/ports/sysutils/portupgrade > > > > then, do: > > portupgrade -o emulators/linux_base linux_base-\* > > > > that should take care of that. > > > > -Adam > > > > > > >> (07.23.2002 @ 2024 PST): Eric Dedrick said, in 1.4K: << > > > > i hope you have a semi-recent ports tree, because you need > > > > linux_base-7.1. > > > > > > installing linux_base 7.1 from the ports gives me the following error. > > > Advice? Thanks. > > > > > > --- > > > > > > (several screen fulls of the same type of stuff)... > > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Eastern from install of > > > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Hawaii from install of > > > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Indiana-Starke from install of > > > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Michigan from install of > > > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Mountain from install of > > > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Pacific from install of > > > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/W-SU from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 > > > conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > > file /usr/bin/catchsegv from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts > > > with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > > *** Error code 1 > > > > > > Stop in /usr/ports/emulators/linux_base. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > > > > > >> end of "Re: linux compatability broken?" from Eric Dedrick << > > > > > > -- > > "Oh good, my dog found the chainsaw." > > -Lilo, "Lilo & Stitch" > > Adam Weinberger > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://vectors.cx > > > >> end of "Re: linux compatability broken?" from Eric Dedrick << -- "Oh good, my dog found the chainsaw." -Lilo, "Lilo & Stitch" Adam Weinberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://vectors.cx To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
Okay, I just installed linux_base 7.1 from the ports and linux compatability is still broken (everything is failing with "bad system call" signal 12). linux.ko is loaded, compatability mode enabled. What do you suggest now? On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Adam Weinberger wrote: > you have to uninstall the old version of linux_base that you have. if > you don't know how to do that, you can always: > > install /usr/ports/sysutils/portupgrade > > then, do: > portupgrade -o emulators/linux_base linux_base-\* > > that should take care of that. > > -Adam > > > >> (07.23.2002 @ 2024 PST): Eric Dedrick said, in 1.4K: << > > > i hope you have a semi-recent ports tree, because you need > > > linux_base-7.1. > > > > installing linux_base 7.1 from the ports gives me the following error. > > Advice? Thanks. > > > > --- > > > > (several screen fulls of the same type of stuff)... > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Eastern from install of > > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Hawaii from install of > > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Indiana-Starke from install of > > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Michigan from install of > > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Mountain from install of > > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Pacific from install of > > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/W-SU from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 > > conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > file /usr/bin/catchsegv from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts > > with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > > *** Error code 1 > > > > Stop in /usr/ports/emulators/linux_base. > > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > > > >> end of "Re: linux compatability broken?" from Eric Dedrick << > > > -- > "Oh good, my dog found the chainsaw." > -Lilo, "Lilo & Stitch" > Adam Weinberger > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://vectors.cx > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
you have to uninstall the old version of linux_base that you have. if you don't know how to do that, you can always: install /usr/ports/sysutils/portupgrade then, do: portupgrade -o emulators/linux_base linux_base-\* that should take care of that. -Adam >> (07.23.2002 @ 2024 PST): Eric Dedrick said, in 1.4K: << > > i hope you have a semi-recent ports tree, because you need > > linux_base-7.1. > > installing linux_base 7.1 from the ports gives me the following error. > Advice? Thanks. > > --- > > (several screen fulls of the same type of stuff)... > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Eastern from install of > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Hawaii from install of > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Indiana-Starke from install of > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Michigan from install of > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Mountain from install of > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Pacific from install of > glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/W-SU from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 > conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > file /usr/bin/catchsegv from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts > with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 > *** Error code 1 > > Stop in /usr/ports/emulators/linux_base. > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > >> end of "Re: linux compatability broken?" from Eric Dedrick << -- "Oh good, my dog found the chainsaw." -Lilo, "Lilo & Stitch" Adam Weinberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://vectors.cx To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
> i hope you have a semi-recent ports tree, because you need > linux_base-7.1. installing linux_base 7.1 from the ports gives me the following error. Advice? Thanks. --- (several screen fulls of the same type of stuff)... file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Eastern from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Hawaii from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Indiana-Starke from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Michigan from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Mountain from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/US/Pacific from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 file /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/W-SU from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 file /usr/bin/catchsegv from install of glibc-common-2.2.2-10 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.1.2-11 *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/ports/emulators/linux_base. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
> if you make changes to the kernel, you need to recompile and reinstall > the kernel, not the base O/S. Yeah, I just usually do both since I keep them both cvsup'd. > however, ld-linux.so.2 has nothing to do with your kernel. what you need > is to install /usr/ports/emulators/linux_base I don't follow. I've made world/kernel plenty of times before and compatability was fine. This time it broke. What changed? I thought all I needed was linux.ko in the kernel and the linux.so's to have binary compatiability. Surely I don't have to install all of redhat inorder to run a pre-built linux binary. > i hope you have a semi-recent ports tree, because you need > linux_base-7.1. Yup. I keep that cvsup'd too. Anyway, I'll give it a try and let you know how it works out. Thanks for the assistance. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
if you make changes to the kernel, you need to recompile and reinstall the kernel, not the base O/S. however, ld-linux.so.2 has nothing to do with your kernel. what you need is to install /usr/ports/emulators/linux_base i hope you have a semi-recent ports tree, because you need linux_base-7.1. -Adam >> (07.23.2002 @ 1435 PST): Eric Dedrick said, in 0.9K: << > > > Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 10:52:49 -0500 (EST) > > > From: Eric Dedrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Subject: linux compatability broken? > > > > > > I recently made a few kernel changes so I remade world. > > > > > > It would seem that linux compatability is now broken. At first things > > > were complaining about the fact that ld-linux.so.2 got moved. After I > > > made symbolic links things failed with a bad system call signal 12. > > > > > > Weren't all of my modules, including the compatibility ones, updated with > > > make world? > > > > barring a knob in (IIRC) /etc/make.conf, kernel modules are built > > and installed during make buildkernel and make installkernel, > > respectively > > Okay, so any guesses why my linux compatiability would break? > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > >> end of "Re: linux compatability broken?" from Eric Dedrick << -- "Oh good, my dog found the chainsaw." -Lilo, "Lilo & Stitch" Adam Weinberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://vectors.cx To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 16:35:38 -0500 (EST) > From: Eric Dedrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Roman Neuhauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: linux compatability broken? > > > > Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 10:52:49 -0500 (EST) > > > From: Eric Dedrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Subject: linux compatability broken? > > > > > > I recently made a few kernel changes so I remade world. > > > > > > It would seem that linux compatability is now broken. At first things > > > were complaining about the fact that ld-linux.so.2 got moved. After I > > > made symbolic links things failed with a bad system call signal 12. > > > > > > Weren't all of my modules, including the compatibility ones, updated with > > > make world? > > > > barring a knob in (IIRC) /etc/make.conf, kernel modules are built > > and installed during make buildkernel and make installkernel, > > respectively > > Okay, so any guesses why my linux compatiability would break? no idea, really. i don't use any linux apps atm. -- FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE 12:08AM up 7 days, 10:27, 7 users, load averages: 0.05, 0.10, 0.07 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
> > Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 10:52:49 -0500 (EST) > > From: Eric Dedrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: linux compatability broken? > > > > I recently made a few kernel changes so I remade world. > > > > It would seem that linux compatability is now broken. At first things > > were complaining about the fact that ld-linux.so.2 got moved. After I > > made symbolic links things failed with a bad system call signal 12. > > > > Weren't all of my modules, including the compatibility ones, updated with > > make world? > > barring a knob in (IIRC) /etc/make.conf, kernel modules are built > and installed during make buildkernel and make installkernel, > respectively Okay, so any guesses why my linux compatiability would break? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: linux compatability broken?
> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 10:52:49 -0500 (EST) > From: Eric Dedrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: linux compatability broken? > > I recently made a few kernel changes so I remade world. > > It would seem that linux compatability is now broken. At first things > were complaining about the fact that ld-linux.so.2 got moved. After I > made symbolic links things failed with a bad system call signal 12. > > Weren't all of my modules, including the compatibility ones, updated with > make world? barring a knob in (IIRC) /etc/make.conf, kernel modules are built and installed during make buildkernel and make installkernel, respectively -- FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE 7:44PM up 7 days, 6:03, 8 users, load averages: 0.03, 0.02, 0.00 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
