Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-11-09 16:12:46) > Samuel Thibault, le Sun 09 Nov 2014 15:56:56 +0100, a écrit : > > Gabriele suggested on IRC that it may be due to unreviewed/unacked > > patches. I don't think anything pending is missing, but something not > > pending is indeed missing: the mig support for protected payload, which > > is commited upstream, but not yet uploaded in Debian. I'll give it a > > try, that can only be an issue indeed :) > > No, it does not change the behavior (although it's very most probably > needed, thanks Gabriele for the idea). I'm wondering: is perhaps > gnumach missing some patch? I do not see MEMORY_OBJECT_INTRAN_PAYLOAD > being taken into account there.
Yes, if the three latest patches (81d37c1, "include: add a payload-aware intran mutator for memory_object_t") were missing from the gnumach headers, that would likely explain this. Justus
