glibc issues with --enable-kernel=2.6.22.5

Bryan Kadzban bryan at kadzban.is-a-geek.net
Tue Jan 25 21:39:54 PST 2011


Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:06:39 -0800, Bryan Kadzban <bryan at kadzban.is-a-geek.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure if that's the best setup; we'll have to make sure at each
>>> glibc release (until the bug is fixed) that no new private-futex tests
>>> are added.  (That the sed is still equivalent to the patch.)  It'd be
>>> nice if the sed could take into account the context of each line, but I
>>> believe that's rather difficult with sed.
>>>
>>> Anyone else have a preference?
>> Given the relative complexity of Andrew's sed expression, and your concerns above,
>> I'd rather we go with the patch.
> 
> Here are more specific, but a little clearer seds:
> 
> sed -i '213 s/PRIVATE_FUTEX/FUTEX_CLOCK_REALTIME/' \
>    nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock.S
> 
> sed -i '195,210 s/PRIVATE_FUTEX/FUTEX_CLOCK_REALTIME/'
>    nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock.S
> 
> or
> 
> sed -i '195,213 s/PRIVATE_FUTEX/FUTEX_CLOCK_REALTIME/' \
>    nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/pthread_rwlock_timed{rd,wr}lock.S
> 
> Actually, using one of these provides an educational example of how to 
> specify an address range for a sed.

Yeah, that extra educational bit helps

> The above would need to be checked for any new release, but we need to 
> do that anyway for a patch and checking/changing these seds would be easier.

Hmm, good point.  OK, sed works for me.  :-)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 261 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/attachments/20110125/c9825f9d/attachment.sig>


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list