Problem with m4 in 2.3.6

Shawn Starr spstarr at visualnet.rootpass.net
Mon Jul 24 03:06:58 PDT 2000


I dont think that matters too much, M4 still should link properly.

On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, Panos Maheras wrote:

> 
> I wrote:
> 
> >> gcc  -o m4 m4.o builtin.o debug.o eval.o format.o freeze.o input.o macro.o
> >> output.o path.o stackovf.o symtab.o ../lib/libm4.a
> >> stackovf.o: In function `setup_stackovf_trap':
> >> /usr/src/m4-1.4/src/stackovf.c:343: the `sigstack' function is dangerous. 
> >> `sigaltstack' should be used instead.
> 
> John Phillips added:
> 
> >A few of us get this problem (reason unknown).  My fix is to compile
> >m4 statically before the "chroot" and then re-compile properly after
> >autoconf and automake.
> 
> This seems the only workable solution to the problem right now. Those 'few of
> us' happen by any chance to install LFS over a glibc 2.0 system (mine is Debian
> 2.1)?? After many *many* tests I'm beginning to think that it's a problem with
> glibc. Let me explain:
> 
> The sigstack function is supposedly taken from siginfo.h from the kernel
> headers, but guess what? The configure script DOESN'T find it (it says something
> like checking for siginfo.h.... No). There are two siginfo.h files under the
> /usr/include directory of the LFS system. One is: asm/siginfo.h (from the
> kernel) the other is: bits/siginfo.h (from the glibc).
> 
> Now, get this: if I copy siginfo.h from /usr/include/asm to /usr/include the
> configure script from m4 FINDS this file (checking for siginfo.h.... Yes) BUT
> during the make step it conflicts with the /usr/include/bits/siginfo.h which has
> the sigstack function defined differently and make stops. If I move
> /usr/include/bits/siginfo.h to /usr/include then the configure script again
> doesn't find siginfo.h. Weird??
> 
> The file from m4 that causes this problem: /src/stackovf.c says that it doesn't
> matter if your system has siginfo.h or not and that it should compile anyway.
> (and the package is installed without problems on a Debian 2.1 system which
> doesn't have siginfo.h either statically or dynamically).
> 
> Gerard Beekmans said:
> 
> >It might have to do how the base system was installed, at least that's
> >my 'educated' guess. I can't reproduce the error so I find it hard to
> >test these things.
> 
> Again I'm asking anyone who has that problem: do you install LFS from a glibc
> 2.0 system?
> 
> >What you can try is this:
> >When compiling m4 it tells you that the sigalstack function is dangerous
> >and some other functions must be used. You can edit that source file and
> >rename sigalstack by that other recommended function name. That way you
> >might end up with a working M4 binary. If it works, let us know so I can
> >update the book on this issue.
> 
> I've tried that and it didn't work because the other function (sigaltstack) does
> not implement some member functions that sigstack does and when I execute make
> it stops.
> 
> Balu added:
> 
> >This sounds like a libsafe or something similar to me - is something
> >like this installed?
> 
> To tell you the truth I don't know. The base system is a Debian 2.1 with only
> the basic packages installed plus whatever else is needed (autoconf, automake,
> bzip2).
> 
> If this turns out to be a glibc 2.0 problem *maybe* we should follow what John
> Phillips suggested: compile statically before and dynamically after (this seems
> to work right now).
> 
> Take care,
> Panos Maheras (arcana at hol.gr).
> 
> --
> Mail archive: http://www.pcrdallas.com/mail-archives/lfs-discuss
> IRC access: server: irc.linuxfromscratch.org port: 6667 channel: #LFS
> Unsubscribe: email lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org and put
> "unsubscribe" (without the quotation marks) in the body of the message
> (no subject is required)
> 

--
Mail archive: http://www.pcrdallas.com/mail-archives/lfs-discuss
IRC access: server: irc.linuxfromscratch.org port: 6667 channel: #LFS
Unsubscribe: email lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org and put
"unsubscribe" (without the quotation marks) in the body of the message
(no subject is required)



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list