2012/3/10 Alexander Leidinger <[email protected]>: >> >> # ./bash >> FATAL: kernel too old >> >> # file bash >> bash: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (GNU/Linux), >> dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, stripped >> >> # sysctl compat.linux.osrelease=2.6.32 >> compat.linux.osrelease: 2.6.16 -> 2.6.32 >> >> # ./bash >> Segmentation fault > > Can you please ktrace it and use linux_kdump to have a look what is the > most likely cause of this? It would be good to know what's missing in > the kernel. >
ldconfig does not work too, any binary crashed, this file is first (it called by port installation script) # ktrace ./ldconfig Segmentation fault # kdump -f ktrace.out 69021 ktrace RET ktrace 0 69021 ktrace CALL execve(0x7fffffffed97,0x7fffffffeb30,0x7fffffffeb40) 69021 ktrace NAMI "./ldconfig" 69021 ldconfig RET linux_olduname 0 69021 ldconfig CALL linux_newuname(0xffffda4a) 69021 ldconfig RET linux_newuname 0 69021 ldconfig CALL linux_brk(0) 69021 ldconfig RET linux_brk 135380992/0x811c000 69021 ldconfig CALL linux_brk(0x811cd40) 69021 ldconfig RET linux_brk 135384384/0x811cd40 69021 ldconfig CALL linux_set_thread_area(0xffffdc00) 69021 ldconfig RET linux_set_thread_area 0 69021 ldconfig PSIG SIGSEGV SIG_DFL code=0x1 >> What do you think about the CentOS? It may be more optimal to look on >> CentOS 6 userland port? > > Any long-term release looks better than what we have now. A RPM based > one (like CentOS) looks more easy to port because of the existing RPM > infrastructure, than any non-RPM based one. I just tested CentOS 6.2 and this system binaries work and run without problem, but I need change compat.linux.osrelease to 2.6.18, I'll make soon port for setup CentOS 6.x userland (like emulators/linux_base-f10 there are all very similar) and send this as PR. -- Svyatoslav _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
