X-pop3-spooler:	POP3MAIL 2.1.0 b 4 980420 -bs-
X-Authentication-Warning:	basis.Desk.nl: listserv set sender to owner-beastium-list AT basis DOT desk DOT nl using -f
Message-ID:	<19981209211443.B29345@cerebro.laendle>
Date:	Wed, 9 Dec 1998 21:14:43 +0100
From:	Marc Lehmann <pcg AT goof DOT com>
To:	Chris Kehler <cbkehler AT rarloa-4 DOT pr DOT mcs DOT net>
Cc:	beastium <beastium-list AT desk DOT nl>
Subject:	Re: Compiling glibc2
Mail-Followup-To:	Chris Kehler <cbkehler AT rarloa-4 DOT pr DOT mcs DOT net>,
	beastium <beastium-list AT desk DOT nl>
References:	<Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 04 DOT 9812091344070 DOT 28137-100000 AT rarloa-4 DOT pr DOT mcs DOT net>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.LNX.4.04.9812091344070.28137-100000@rarloa-4.pr.mcs.net>; from Chris Kehler on Wed, Dec 09, 1998 at 01:51:28PM -0600
X-Operating-System:	Linux version 2.1.131 (root AT cerebro) (gcc version egcs-2.92.25 19981130 (gcc2 ss-980609 experimental))
Sender:	owner-beastium-list AT basis DOT Desk DOT nl
Status:	RO
Lines:	36

On Wed, Dec 09, 1998 at 01:51:28PM -0600, Chris Kehler wrote:
>   First, if I use the -malign options with pgcc,  I think I remember
> reading somewhere that I'd have to recompile everything that uses the
> library with the same -malign options.  That would be a chore and a half.

Be careful, glibc uses some alignment tricks itself, so compiling it with
-malign-double or -mstack-align-double will (unfortunately) break it in
subtle ways.

>   Secondly, since I can't seem to find sources for glibc 2.0.7, are there
> any foreseeable problems with downgrading to 2.0.6?

No, but 2.0.7 is easy to find, you can use ftpsearch for example
(ftpsearch.lycos.com)

>   Thirdly, on an unrelated note.  Someone said earlier that the most
> recent snapshots miscompile the kernel.  Is that the same bug in ioport.c
> that was fixed earlier, or is it more bad code in ther kernel?

In theory there is more bad code in the kernel (much more), but that bad
code does result in miscompield code only rarely.

> pgcc 1.1.1 will still compile the kernel properly though, correct?

No, neither 2.1 nor 2.0 are safe, 1.1.1 is just not warning about these
problems, and might generate working code "sometimes" or even often, but its
not my system that crashes.

      -----==-                                              |
      ----==-- _                                            |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann       +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       pcg AT goof DOT com       |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\                          --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                        |
                                                          |

- Raw text -