On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 09:26:56AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> this is a bit more debugging info on the glibc 2.3 release (I will try the
> latest version soon, I just want to send this as long as I am still able to
> reproduce it). I don't really know how to make sense of this. I spotted
>
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 09:26:56AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> When leaving gdb at that point, the sh process (which forked), still runs.
> And after I few seconds I get a kernel panic. This seems to be another bug.
> (See below for a kernel backtrace, which looks ok to me).
> I will set a b
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:21:01AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> Misunderstanding by me. It seems that only exceptions for the signal thread
> are handled by proc. So it doesn't seem that the proc server is involved at
> all, and I only have to look at the signal thread.
Uhm. How can I debug
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> It's indeed the case that a bombardement of exceptions are generated, and
> eventually the kernel gets short on reply ports or so. The exception
> management in glibc and the proc server looks peculiar. Roland, do you have
> an i
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 09:26:56AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this is a bit more debugging info on the glibc 2.3 release (I will try the
> latest version soon, I just want to send this as long as I am still able to
> reproduce it). I don't really know how to make sense of this. I s
Hi,
this is a bit more debugging info on the glibc 2.3 release (I will try the
latest version soon, I just want to send this as long as I am still able to
reproduce it). I don't really know how to make sense of this. I spotted
that main_arena's next pointer is zero, while the code assumes that t
