Package: dietlibc-dev
Version: 0.32-5
Severity: important

i...@luque:~$ diet gcc size.c 
/usr/lib/diet/lib-sparc/libc.a(vprintf.o): In function `vprintf':
vprintf.c:(.text+0x1c): warning: warning: the printf functions add several 
kilobytes of bloat.
i...@luque:~$ ./a.out 
sizeof(uint64_t) = 4
i...@luque:~$ gcc size.c 
i...@luque:~$ ./a.out 
sizeof(uint64_t) = 8
i...@luque:~$ cat size.c 
#include <stdint.h>
#include <stdio.h>

int main() {
        printf("sizeof(uint64_t) = %d\n", sizeof(uint64_t));
        return 0;
}
i...@luque:~$ 


That is the smallest example I have to reproduce the problem. I'm not 
sure what to mark the severity as, since this bug did prevent the 
initscripts from finishing. The problem is the struct dirent64 does 
not agree with the kernel, so /etc/init.d/util-vserver runs setattr, 
which calls readdir in an infinite loop, since ent->d_reclen = 0. Is 
there a way to say this bug blocks #603882, or do I need to wait for 
a bug number then poke control?

If you want to reproduce the infinite loop, compile this program with
diet gcc -g -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 break.c:

#include <stdio.h>
#include <dirent.h>
int main() {
  DIR *dir = opendir(".");
  struct dirent *ent;
  while (ent = readdir(dir)) {
    printf("file: %s\n", ent->d_name);
  }
}


-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: sparc (sparc64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-vserver-sparc64 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

dietlibc-dev depends on no packages.

Versions of packages dietlibc-dev recommends:
pn  dietlibc                      <none>     (no description available)

Versions of packages dietlibc-dev suggests:
pn  dietlibc-doc                  <none>     (no description available)

-- no debconf information



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Reply via email to