1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.DEBIAN.BUGS.DIST

  • Bug#265486: NPTL-related

    From Daniel Jacobowitz@1:229/2 to GOTO Masanori on Sat Aug 21 17:00:15 2004
    XPost: linux.debian.maint.glibc
    From: [email protected]

    On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 09:18:39AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
    NPTL/TLS is enabled when:

    (1) libc6-i686 is installed.
    (2) LD_ASSUME_KERNEL environment variable is not used or is set >2.6.

    So you can disable TLS/NPTL using LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.1 or removing libc6-i686. If UML can provide information about TLS support for

    No, you have to use LD_ASSUME_KERNEL; there's an NPTL package in libc6
    also.

    It's UML issue, not glibc. Should this report be opened for a while?
    If you have no objection, we'll close this bug.

    Or reassign it to user-mode-linux?

    --
    Daniel Jacobowitz


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
  • From Simon Rumble@1:229/2 to All on Fri Aug 13 15:50:05 2004
    XPost: linux.debian.maint.glibc
    From: [email protected]

    Ack! Turns out it's a UML thing to do with NPTL. I apologise for the hysteria, but it kinda seemed rather broken 8)

    Perhaps we could implement some kind of check for a UML kernel, at least while they don't support NPTL/TLS?


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
  • From GOTO Masanori@1:229/2 to Simon Rumble on Sun Aug 15 05:00:09 2004
    XPost: linux.debian.maint.glibc
    From: [email protected]

    severity 265486 normal
    tags 265486 moreinfo
    thanks

    At 13 Aug 2004 13:25:17 -0000,
    Simon Rumble wrote:
    Ack! Turns out it's a UML thing to do with NPTL. I apologise for
    the hysteria, but it kinda seemed rather broken 8)

    Perhaps we could implement some kind of check for a UML kernel, at
    least while they don't support NPTL/TLS?

    At least we have not heard about UML problem with the 2.6 kernel. The
    current user-mode-linux 2.4 kernel and uml\* packages in debian works
    well. The recent modification for glibc from -13 to -16 is not so
    large.

    Please investigate more and report us the detailed information. If
    you don't have spare time to check it, and you have no objection,
    we'll close it.

    Regards,
    -- gotom


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
  • From Rev Simon Rumble@1:229/2 to All on Mon Aug 16 18:30:12 2004
    XPost: linux.debian.maint.glibc
    From: [email protected]

    This one time, at band camp, GOTO Masanori gotom-at-debian.or.jp |Debian bugs| wrote:

    At least we have not heard about UML problem with the 2.6 kernel. The current user-mode-linux 2.4 kernel and uml\* packages in debian works
    well. The recent modification for glibc from -13 to -16 is not so
    large.

    Please investigate more and report us the detailed information. If
    you don't have spare time to check it, and you have no objection,
    we'll close it.

    This is beyond me, but I'm quoting from the forum for linode.com:

    UML does not (yet) support Thread Local Storage (TLS) in either 2.4 or
    2.6. TLS is required by the Native POSIX Thread Library (NPTL) so NPTL
    is also not supported by UML.

    The difference in the way the problem manifests itself (or not) between
    2.4 and 2.6 is because NPTL enabled /lib/ld.so checks 'uname' in 2.4
    kernels. If extraversion begins with "-ntpl" then this 2.4 kernel has
    NPTL (and TLS) support. If extraversion doesn't have that string, ld.so
    assumes that the kernel doesn't have NPTL (or TLS) support. If the
    kernel is >=2.6, then ld.so assumes that NPTL (and TLS) support is
    present, so things start to go haywire under UML, where this assumption
    is invalid.

    --
    Rev Simon Rumble <[email protected]>
    www.rumble.net

    "Call me a cynic, but for me "much more stable than the last
    version of Windows" is not exactly a ringing endorsement."
    - James Riden


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
  • From GOTO Masanori@1:229/2 to Rev Simon Rumble on Wed Aug 18 02:40:08 2004
    XPost: linux.debian.maint.glibc
    From: [email protected]

    At Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:04:26 +0100,
    Rev Simon Rumble wrote:
    This one time, at band camp, GOTO Masanori gotom-at-debian.or.jp |Debian bugs| wrote:

    At least we have not heard about UML problem with the 2.6 kernel. The current user-mode-linux 2.4 kernel and uml\* packages in debian works
    well. The recent modification for glibc from -13 to -16 is not so
    large.

    Please investigate more and report us the detailed information. If
    you don't have spare time to check it, and you have no objection,
    we'll close it.

    This is beyond me, but I'm quoting from the forum for linode.com:

    Thanks for your point.

    UML does not (yet) support Thread Local Storage (TLS) in either 2.4 or
    2.6. TLS is required by the Native POSIX Thread Library (NPTL) so NPTL
    is also not supported by UML.

    OK, that makes sense.

    The difference in the way the problem manifests itself (or not)
    between 2.4 and 2.6 is because NPTL enabled /lib/ld.so checks
    'uname' in 2.4 kernels. If extraversion begins with "-ntpl" then
    this 2.4 kernel has NPTL (and TLS) support. If extraversion doesn't
    have that string, ld.so assumes that the kernel doesn't have NPTL
    (or TLS) support.

    This is RedHat/SuSE related issue. We debian does not support nptl
    2.4 kernel.

    If the kernel is >=2.6, then ld.so assumes that NPTL (and TLS)
    support is present, so things start to go haywire under UML, where
    this assumption is invalid.

    NPTL/TLS is enabled when:

    (1) libc6-i686 is installed.
    (2) LD_ASSUME_KERNEL environment variable is not used or is set >2.6.

    So you can disable TLS/NPTL using LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.1 or removing libc6-i686. If UML can provide information about TLS support for
    ld.so, we can implement to disable NPTL/TLS under UML. If not - you
    need to disable NPTL/TLS by your hand.

    It's UML issue, not glibc. Should this report be opened for a while?
    If you have no objection, we'll close this bug.

    Regards,
    -- gotom


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)