execvpe and glibc 2.10
martinrb at google.com
Wed Jul 29 20:39:36 PDT 2009
Of course, it's all my fault.
First, for having used a symbol that libc implementers are likely to add.
Second, for actually asking glibc implementers to add that very symbol.
Third, for forgetting that this is an issue in openjdk6 as well.
Anyways, I intend to commit these patches to their respective forests:
As ever, we need a Sun bug (could Michael or Joe file it?):
Synopsis: Rename execvpe to avoid symbol clash with glibc 2.10.
glibc 2.10 added the long-awaited "missing link" function execvpe
(thank you! No really!)
But the JDK already has a function of that name, which needs renaming,
to avoid a compile time failure in UNIXProcess_md.c
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 08:24, Andrew John
Hughes<gnu_andrew at member.fsf.org> wrote:
> 2009/7/28 Martin Buchholz <martinrb at google.com>:
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 06:08, Michael McMahon<Michael.McMahon at sun.com> wrote:
>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>> 2009/7/28 Michael McMahon <Michael.McMahon at sun.com>:
>>>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>>>> 2009/7/9 Martin Buchholz <martinrb at google.com>:
>>>> rename-execvpe is the one I'm particularly concerned about. It's a
>>>> trivial patch, but without it, OpenJDK builds are going to start
>>>> failing as distros move to the new glibc (e.g. Fedora 12). It's
>>>> already an issue for users of Fedora rawhide.
>>> Ok. Maybe we can push rename-execvpe and RESTARTABLE first.
>> RESTARTABLE depends on vfork-exec, and I would not like to do
>> the work to reorder them.
>> Changes to fork-exec are always high-risk,
>> and I would like to see some more testing on these
>> before committing to openjdk proper.
>> That could be done by having icedtea7 import them,
>> and by having Michael or another Sun person run them
>> through Sun testing.
>> There are more changes to fork-exec to come,
>> although they will probably not affect the average Linux user's
>> Michael and I have been doing other things the past few weeks.
> Sure, we can do some testing with IcedTea7 after the release for M4,
> which should be sometime in the next week or so.
> In the meantime, can you or me push the execvpe cleanup to the 6 and 7
> forests (tl presumably for 7)? Or is there a further issue there?
> You've not mentioned it in either reply.
> Joe, I assume this is okay for 6? Without it the build is broken on
> newer distributions.
> Andrew :-)
> Free Java Software Engineer
> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
> Support Free Java!
> Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
> PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
> Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8
More information about the core-libs-dev