[ANNOUNCE] 0.9.32-rc3 released

[Peter Mazinger]

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Tue, 10 May 2011 23:35:29 +0200
> Von: "Peter Mazinger" <ps.m at gmx.net>
> An: uclibc at uclibc.org
> Betreff: Re: [ANNOUNCE] 0.9.32-rc3 released

> 
> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> > Datum: Tue, 10 May 2011 20:31:12 +0100
> > Von: Will Newton <will.newton at gmail.com>
> > An: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep.dot.nop at gmail.com>
> > CC: uclibc at uclibc.org
> > Betreff: Re: [ANNOUNCE] 0.9.32-rc3 released
> 
> > On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 8:21 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> > <rep.dot.nop at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 07:57:12PM +0100, Will Newton wrote:
> > >>On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> > >><rep.dot.nop at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 05:49:02PM +0100, Will Newton wrote:
> > >>>>On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> > >>>><rep.dot.nop at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> We are shaking out some bugs still, but it will be released RSN
> > (TM).
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Are there any plans to fix this bug?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>https://bugs.uclibc.org/2089
> > >>>
> > >>> This is supposed to work just fine with NPTL.
> > >>
> > >>So is support for linuxthreads dropped with this release? It seems a
> > >>shame when people are willing to support it.
> > >
> > > Thing is that you can only workaround it unless you have TLS. For
> arches
> > > that already have NPTL i suggest you use it. If folks find it clearer
> we
> > > can reflect that recommendation in the configury.
> > 
> > The patch in the bug from Peter works and I have yet to see a clear
> > statement of what is wrong with it. Without the patch linuxthreads is
> > pretty much unusable.
> 
> generally speaking of this sort of failures:
> - it would be better, if we would disable
> *hidden_proto/def/attribute_hidden for static builds (but that would mean double time for the build)

another issue related to this (from __uClibc_main.c):
    /* Note: It is possible that any initialization done above could
     * have resulted in errno being set nonzero, so set it to 0 before
     * we call main.
     */
    if (likely(not_null_ptr(__errno_location)))
        *(__errno_location()) = 0;

    /* Set h_errno to 0 as well */
    if (likely(not_null_ptr(__h_errno_location)))
        *(__h_errno_location()) = 0;

This code is IMHO wrong in __uClibc_main.c, it should not directly address
__*errno_location, it should only use errno/h_errno, since these have different meanings depending on config options

Peter
> > _______________________________________________
> > uClibc mailing list
> > uClibc at uclibc.org
> > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
> 
> -- 
> Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
> belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
> _______________________________________________
> uClibc mailing list
> uClibc at uclibc.org
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc

-- 
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de