[arch-dev-public] [signoff] klibc 1.5-4, klibc-extras 2.3-2, klibc-module-init-tools 3.2.2-2
I rebuilt klibc against the 2.6.24 headers and also rebuilt klibc-extras, klibc-module-init-tools and klibc-udev.
Please sign off on the first three.
klibc-udev has to be updated to 118 before moving to core, Aaron said he'd take care of that, I built 116-3 for now so the rest can be tested.
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
I rebuilt klibc against the 2.6.24 headers and also rebuilt klibc-extras, klibc-module-init-tools and klibc-udev.
Please sign off on the first three.
klibc-udev has to be updated to 118 before moving to core, Aaron said he'd take care of that, I built 116-3 for now so the rest can be tested.
I built a new initramfs with the testing klibc stuff and I can still boot. I don't know how to test it outside of that though - I'll signoff regardless
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Travis Willard travis@archlinux.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
I rebuilt klibc against the 2.6.24 headers and also rebuilt klibc-extras, klibc-module-init-tools and klibc-udev.
Please sign off on the first three.
klibc-udev has to be updated to 118 before moving to core, Aaron said he'd take care of that, I built 116-3 for now so the rest can be tested.
I built a new initramfs with the testing klibc stuff and I can still boot. I don't know how to test it outside of that though - I'll signoff regardless
er, i686. Sorry
2008/3/2, Travis Willard travis@archlinux.org:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
I rebuilt klibc against the 2.6.24 headers and also rebuilt klibc-extras, klibc-module-init-tools and klibc-udev.
Please sign off on the first three.
klibc-udev has to be updated to 118 before moving to core, Aaron said he'd take care of that, I built 116-3 for now so the rest can be tested.
I built a new initramfs with the testing klibc stuff and I can still boot. I don't know how to test it outside of that though - I'll signoff regardless
I've just tried the v86d hook with klibc-based binary - and everything works perfectly, Signed off (i686). (btw, uvesafb is nice, yay!)
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 8:06 AM, Roman Kyrylych roman.kyrylych@gmail.com wrote:
2008/3/2, Travis Willard travis@archlinux.org:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
I rebuilt klibc against the 2.6.24 headers and also rebuilt klibc-extras, klibc-module-init-tools and klibc-udev.
Please sign off on the first three.
klibc-udev has to be updated to 118 before moving to core, Aaron said he'd take care of that, I built 116-3 for now so the rest can be tested.
I built a new initramfs with the testing klibc stuff and I can still boot. I don't know how to test it outside of that though - I'll signoff regardless
I've just tried the v86d hook with klibc-based binary - and everything works perfectly, Signed off (i686). (btw, uvesafb is nice, yay!)
I'll give another safety signoff for i686.
-Dan
Only change compared to -4 is that kinit is replaced by kinit.shared and the static kinit is deleted. No idea why we didn't do this before.
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
Only change compared to -4 is that kinit is replaced by kinit.shared and the static kinit is deleted. No idea why we didn't do this before.
Hrm, I just had an error, but it may have been my fault. I got the "replace: command not found" which means, for some reason, the klibc-extras binaries weren't in the image.
I did have a patched version of klibc prior to -Syu'ing to this, so I had to -f some conflicts.
Unless someone else has a similar issue, consider me signed off
2008/3/6, Aaron Griffin aaronmgriffin@gmail.com:
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
Only change compared to -4 is that kinit is replaced by kinit.shared and the static kinit is deleted. No idea why we didn't do this before.
Hrm, I just had an error, but it may have been my fault. I got the "replace: command not found" which means, for some reason, the klibc-extras binaries weren't in the image.
I did have a patched version of klibc prior to -Syu'ing to this, so I had to -f some conflicts.
Unless someone else has a similar issue, consider me signed off
Hm, I have "/bin/{kbd_mode,loadkeys,setfont} not found" with the new kbd package I've built, *but* these files *were* in image, and that happened with older klibc version Aaron, could you please check (with break=y in kernel command line and then echo /bin/* in the prompt) if replace is really in image or this is the same weird error as I got.
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 2:06 AM, Roman Kyrylych roman.kyrylych@gmail.com wrote:
2008/3/6, Aaron Griffin aaronmgriffin@gmail.com:
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
Only change compared to -4 is that kinit is replaced by kinit.shared and the static kinit is deleted. No idea why we didn't do this before.
Hrm, I just had an error, but it may have been my fault. I got the "replace: command not found" which means, for some reason, the klibc-extras binaries weren't in the image.
I did have a patched version of klibc prior to -Syu'ing to this, so I had to -f some conflicts.
Unless someone else has a similar issue, consider me signed off
Hm, I have "/bin/{kbd_mode,loadkeys,setfont} not found" with the new kbd package I've built, *but* these files *were* in image, and that happened with older klibc version Aaron, could you please check (with break=y in kernel command line and then echo /bin/* in the prompt) if replace is really in image or this is the same weird error as I got.
No I can't. Without klibc-extras the system will not boot. I had to boot with a livecd and rebuild the image.
Aaron Griffin schrieb:
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
Only change compared to -4 is that kinit is replaced by kinit.shared and the static kinit is deleted. No idea why we didn't do this before.
Hrm, I just had an error, but it may have been my fault. I got the "replace: command not found" which means, for some reason, the klibc-extras binaries weren't in the image.
I did have a patched version of klibc prior to -Syu'ing to this, so I had to -f some conflicts.
Unless someone else has a similar issue, consider me signed off
[x86_64][19:29:53][thomas@artin ~]$ type klibc-dash klibc-dash is aliased to `PS1="dash$ " PS2="> " PATH="/usr/lib/klibc/bin" /usr/lib/klibc/bin/sh' [x86_64][19:29:55][thomas@artin ~]$ klibc-dash dash$ replace usage: replace [-q] <string> <to replace> [<with what>]Segment violation dash$
participants (5)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Dan McGee
-
Roman Kyrylych
-
Thomas Bächler
-
Travis Willard