Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-04-12 Thread Émeric MASCHINO
Hi, Probably message for posterity as nobody cares ia64 anymore, but gcc optimization isn't the cause of this, as alluded to earlier. While it seems to sometimes fix the problem, I'm now having various -O1-compiled kernels on Gentoo. Some exhibit the GDB issue, others don't. Émeric 2014-01-

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-01-19 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 08:40:27PM +0100, Émeric MASCHINO wrote: > > [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2013/05/msg00065.html <=== > BTW, why is it archived on debian-68k? Because it was send to debian-ports@lists and not debian-ia64@lists like this, and debian-ports goes to all the porter l

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-01-19 Thread Émeric MASCHINO
2014/1/12 Ben Hutchings : > > If you have space to install wheezy on a separate partition, please can > you try that. > > (Of course, that crash ought to be fixed in 3.2.y. But I don't know > that anyone will have the time and knowledge to do so. And it's not > part of this bug.) No more empty p

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-01-12 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Sun, 2014-01-12 at 22:48 +0100, Émeric MASCHINO wrote: > 2014/1/12 Ben Hutchings : > > > > Sorry, I'm being silly. udev is built as part of systemd now, so this > > is independent of whether you use systemd as init. And systemd doesn't > > currently run as init in the initramfs. > > Uh, OK. >

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-01-12 Thread Émeric MASCHINO
2014/1/12 Ben Hutchings : > > Sorry, I'm being silly. udev is built as part of systemd now, so this > is independent of whether you use systemd as init. And systemd doesn't > currently run as init in the initramfs. Uh, OK. How can I help further? Emeric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debi

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-01-12 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Sun, 2014-01-12 at 22:30 +0100, Émeric MASCHINO wrote: > 2014/1/12 Ben Hutchings : > > > > You can have sysvinit and systemd installed in parallel and then use the > > 'init' kernel parameter to switch between them. Only systemd-sysv > > conflicts/replaces sysvinit. > > So, I've reinstalled sy

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-01-12 Thread Émeric MASCHINO
2014/1/12 Ben Hutchings : > > You can have sysvinit and systemd installed in parallel and then use the > 'init' kernel parameter to switch between them. Only systemd-sysv > conflicts/replaces sysvinit. So, I've reinstalled sysvinit and sysvinit-core that purged systemd-sysv. I can't however remov

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-01-12 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Sun, 2014-01-12 at 21:16 +0100, Émeric MASCHINO wrote: > 2014/1/12 Ben Hutchings : > > > > So this is a crash, not an incompatibility with the newer systemd. > > [...] > > > Can you test the 3.2 kernel with sysvinit, in case this is a bug that's > > specifically provoked by systemd? > > That'

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-01-12 Thread Émeric MASCHINO
2014/1/12 Ben Hutchings : > > So this is a crash, not an incompatibility with the newer systemd. [...] > Can you test the 3.2 kernel with sysvinit, in case this is a bug that's > specifically provoked by systemd? That's why I was saying "too old for my current Debian install" on Jan 6th. Since

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-01-12 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Sun, 2014-01-12 at 19:15 +0100, Émeric MASCHINO wrote: > 2014/1/7 Ben Hutchings : > > On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 10:15 +0100, Émeric MASCHINO wrote: > > > > I don't understand that - I still have 3.2 installed on this unstable > > (i386) system and can still boot it. How does it go wrong? > > It s

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-01-12 Thread Émeric MASCHINO
2014/1/7 Ben Hutchings : > On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 10:15 +0100, Émeric MASCHINO wrote: > > I don't understand that - I still have 3.2 installed on this unstable > (i386) system and can still boot it. How does it go wrong? It seems to crash with something wrong with systemd. You're getting in loop

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-01-06 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 10:15 +0100, Émeric MASCHINO wrote: > Hi, > > And happy new year! > > 2013/12/20 Ben Hutchings : > >> > I actually tried building the kernel like that, so you could try the > >> > packages in: > >> > > >> > http://people.debian.org/~benh/packages/wheezy-ia64-kernel-O1/ > >>

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2014-01-06 Thread Émeric MASCHINO
Hi, And happy new year! 2013/12/20 Ben Hutchings : >> > I actually tried building the kernel like that, so you could try the >> > packages in: >> > >> > http://people.debian.org/~benh/packages/wheezy-ia64-kernel-O1/ >> >> Was your O1-compiled kernel working fine? > > I have no idea as no-one has

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2013-12-20 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 09:15:23PM +0100, Émeric MASCHINO wrote: > 2013/12/12 Ben Hutchings : > > So far as I know, there is no longer any commercial development of > > Linux on Itanium. Some old 'enterprise' distributions might > > continue to be supported for a few years but mainline isn't > > s

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2013-12-20 Thread Émeric MASCHINO
2013/12/12 Ben Hutchings : > So far as I know, there is no longer any commercial development of > Linux on Itanium. Some old 'enterprise' distributions might > continue to be supported for a few years but mainline isn't > supported. It seems that Intel must provide hp with Itanium CPUs till 2017

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2013-12-12 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:20:30PM +0100, Émeric MASCHINO wrote: > Ben, > > I was not reporting this as a reproach, I understood that. > but simply to track down which kernels work and which don't. > From my records: > - 2.6.38: KO (*) see below > - 3.0.0-2: OK > - 3.1.0-1: KO > - 3.2.23: KO > -

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2013-12-12 Thread Patrick Baggett
I kind of wonder if it has anything to do with compiler code generation; I don't remember if you checked whether -O[0,1,2,3] on the kernel changed anything. The appearance is so random, but when it does appear, it's stuck for that version (i.e. not just a race issue that is hard to repro). Patrick

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2013-12-12 Thread Émeric MASCHINO
Ben, I was not reporting this as a reproach, but simply to track down which kernels work and which don't. From my records: - 2.6.38: KO (*) see below - 3.0.0-2: OK - 3.1.0-1: KO - 3.2.23: KO - 3.2.35-2: OK - 3.2.46-1+deb7u1: KO - 3.10.11-1: OK - 3.11.8-1: KO - 3.11.10-1: KO About upstream, I stil

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2013-12-10 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:36:37PM +0100, Émeric MASCHINO wrote: > FYI, linux-image-3.11-2-mckinley 3.11.10-1 in today's Jessie updates > didn't change anything w.r.t. gdb problem. Of course it didn't. If you want ia64 fixed then you'll have to talk to upstream or fix it yourself. Ben. -- Ben

Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1

2013-12-10 Thread Émeric MASCHINO
FYI, linux-image-3.11-2-mckinley 3.11.10-1 in today's Jessie updates didn't change anything w.r.t. gdb problem. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAA9x