[9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Charles Forsyth]

having upgraded a machine to ubunut 10.04LTS yesterday,
9vx now crashes with a segmentation violation shortly after
saying it is starting /bin/rc. has anyone else a similar
problem on that or another linux system? 9vx itself was unchanged,
but i also tried recompiling it (in case a linux include file had
changed subtly) but it made no difference.

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[ron minnich]

what kernel version is it nowadays?

ron

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Charles Forsyth]

2.6.32-21-generic according to uname -a

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[ron minnich]

On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net> wrote:
> 2.6.32-21-generic according to uname -a
>
>

hmm. I'm running 9vx just fine on 2.6.33 -- a non-ubongo version. I
wonder if some ubuntu patch to the kernel has broken something?

Blast. if you do an ldd on it what libc etc. is it depending on? Could
this be another one of those weird libc problems that crops up with
specialized 686 or tls-specific libcs? I'm running out again but we
can compare the libcs we are depending on.

I'm happier than ever that I've dumped ubuntu and replaced it with
tinycore. I did a trial install of 9.10 this week on an x60. It
loaded. It booted and demanded that it be allowed to upgrade 271
packages. it loaded them and installed them. It no longer booted. That
did it for me ... tinycore is a bit of a caveman environment but I'm
clearly not sophisticated enough for ubuntu ... I need an OS for "the
rest of us knuckle-draggers".

ron

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Charles Forsyth]

>2.6.32-21-generic according to uname -a

or is that a combination?

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Iruata Souza]

On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net> wrote:
> having upgraded a machine to ubunut 10.04LTS yesterday,
> 9vx now crashes with a segmentation violation shortly after
> saying it is starting /bin/rc. has anyone else a similar
> problem on that or another linux system? 9vx itself was unchanged,
> but i also tried recompiling it (in case a linux include file had
> changed subtly) but it made no difference.
>
>

i'm having problems with ubuntu 9.04 but i don't get any segment
violation iirc. the precompiled binary works, compiling one myself
does not.

iru

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Charles Forsyth]

% ldd 9vx.Linux	# old
	linux-gate.so.1 =>  (0xb7720000)
	libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib/libX11.so.6 (0xb7617000)
	...

% ldd 9vx	# new
	linux-gate.so.1 => (0x00704000)
	libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x00c35000)
	...

where an obvious difference is that what i take to be addresses
have moved from high memory to low memory, which might have something to do with it.
i don't know what the values mean, because ldd(1) doesn't bother to tell you.

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Charles Forsyth]

% ldd 9vx.Linux	# old
	...
% ldd 9vx	# new

note that `old' is run on an existing 9.04 (2.6.28-18-generic), which works,
and `new' is the 10.04 (2.6.32-21-generic), which doesn't.

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Iruata Souza]

On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net> wrote:
> % ldd 9vx.Linux # old
>        ...
> % ldd 9vx       # new
>
> note that `old' is run on an existing 9.04 (2.6.28-18-generic), which works,
> and `new' is the 10.04 (2.6.32-21-generic), which doesn't.
>

can you run the current 9vx in 9.04?

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Mathieu Lonjaret]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 137 bytes --]

Fwiw, 9vx does build and run fine on 10.04 here.
Lemme know if I can give you some relevant info which might help.

Cheers,
Mathieu

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 3582 bytes --]

From: Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net>
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Subject: Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS
Date: Sat, 1 May 2010 22:33:23 +0100
Message-ID: <2d567192c754d7cdfe78dd1f4bbe8d30@terzarima.net>

% ldd 9vx.Linux	# old
	...
% ldd 9vx	# new

note that `old' is run on an existing 9.04 (2.6.28-18-generic), which works,
and `new' is the 10.04 (2.6.32-21-generic), which doesn't.

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Charles Forsyth]

>can you run the current 9vx in 9.04?

yes

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Iruata Souza]

On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net> wrote:
>>can you run the current 9vx in 9.04?
>
> yes
>
>

this version madness confuses me. i could not get it to run on 9.10.
9.04 was fine.

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Charles Forsyth]

>this version madness confuses me. i could not get it to run on 9.10.

i had 9vx running fine in 9.10 on the same machine.
it was the upgrade to 10.04 LTS that messed it up today.
i wonder why the library allocation addresses are different.

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Vinu Rajashekhar]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 490 bytes --]

The address shown by ldd can even vary from run to run, for the same file -

http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Kernel/2005-03/4363.html

On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 3:27 AM, Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net>wrote:

> >this version madness confuses me. i could not get it to run on 9.10.
>
> i had 9vx running fine in 9.10 on the same machine.
> it was the upgrade to 10.04 LTS that messed it up today.
> i wonder why the library allocation addresses are different.
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 863 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[ron minnich]

On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 10:48 PM, Vinu Rajashekhar <vinutheraj@gmail.com> wrote:
> The address shown by ldd can even vary from run to run, for the same file -

yeah it's a feechur.

But still all my libs are living in high half of 32-bit space on a
running instance.

The two LOAD segments on my 9vx are :
  LOAD           0x000000 0x08048000 0x08048000 0x6f2f4 0x6f2f4 R E 0x1000
  LOAD           0x06fefc 0x080b8efc 0x080b8efc 0x77204 0x18b81c RW  0x1000

What are yours after building?

This is my libc: /lib/libc.so.6 -> libc-2.9.so

ron

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[sixforty]

The update to 10.04 has overloaded my email with messages from ubuntu's dosemu forum. Basically the same issue as with 9vx. A fix [sic] is suggested. So, question is:

On Sat, 1 May 2010 23:36:08 +0200
"Mathieu Lonjaret" <mathieu.lonjaret@gmail.com> wrote:

> Fwiw, 9vx does build and run fine on 10.04 here.
> Lemme know if I can give you some relevant info which might help.
>
> Cheers,
> Mathieu
>

Mathieu: have you perhaps applied the fix to run some emulator, and it's "fixing" 9vx?
--
sixforty <six@sixforty.net>

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[Mathieu Lonjaret]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 258 bytes --]

Not that I know of.  it's a lucid lynx install I did when it was still
in beta and I haven't kept it up to date since then, so maybe that's
where the difference lies.
How do I check if that fix you're speaking of is installed or not?

Cheers,
Mathieu

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 4247 bytes --]

From: sixforty <six@sixforty.net>
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Subject: Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS
Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 04:54:50 -0400
Message-ID: <20100504045450.5d14892c.six@sixforty.net>

The update to 10.04 has overloaded my email with messages from ubuntu's dosemu forum. Basically the same issue as with 9vx. A fix [sic] is suggested. So, question is:

On Sat, 1 May 2010 23:36:08 +0200
"Mathieu Lonjaret" <mathieu.lonjaret@gmail.com> wrote:

> Fwiw, 9vx does build and run fine on 10.04 here.
> Lemme know if I can give you some relevant info which might help.
>
> Cheers,
> Mathieu
>

Mathieu: have you perhaps applied the fix to run some emulator, and it's "fixing" 9vx?
--
sixforty <six@sixforty.net>

Re: [9fans] 9vx and ubuntu 10.04LTS

[sixforty]

 On Tue, 4 May 2010 11:06:29 +0200
 "Mathieu Lonjaret" <mathieu.lonjaret@gmail.com> wrote:

 > Not that I know of.  it's a lucid lynx install I did when it was still
 > in beta and I haven't kept it up to date since then, so maybe that's
 > where the difference lies.
 > How do I check if that fix you're speaking of is installed or not?
 >
 > Cheers,
 > Mathieu
 >
 /sbin/sysctl vm.mmap_min_addr

 A setting of 0 indicates that the patch has been applied. Often, root doesn't need it, but sometimes does.

 And this is my last post until I find where my email header settings have been hidden, and exterminate them. Sorry.

sixforty <six@sixforty.net>