[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Strange behaviour after cross-compiling

From: Farid Hajji
Subject: Re: Strange behaviour after cross-compiling
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 11:55:17 +0100

> > 3. commands can be used as usual (e.g. ls works etc...),
> >    but as soon as non-dumb screen capabilities are needed
> >    (including pipes!), I get the following error message:
> > 
> > bash [36: 1] tcsetattr: (ipc/mig) server type check failure
> That means the message that was send by the user is rejected by the mig
> generated code on the server side. This seems to point to a broken cross-mig
> or something like that. Make sure everything is allright with your cross mig
> (build it from current CVS), and the *.defs files in the include/hurd
> directory of the build tree are allright. Then recompile glibc and the Hurd
> or so.
That didn't help either. Even with a new set of cross-compile tools
(including mig from cvs) and recompiling gnumach, glibc and hurd
from cvs yields the same error again. Besides, everything _else_
works as expected, so it is very unlikely that mig is wrong.

The only thing I didn't try yet was to re[cross-]compile bash
against libc 2.2. Maybe the transition from 2.1.x to 2.2 was
not so smooth?

> > Every time this error occurs, the program is stopped by bash
> > and resuming it with 'fg' results in the same error again.
> I have seen this recently, but only with a very hacked glibc I tried
> locally. So I know what you see, but don't know what happens in your case.
This is very strange. glibc was cross-compiled directly from cvs
with no changes at all (yet). What can I do to help track down
this problem?

> This has nothing to do with the TERM variable. The TIOCSETA ioctl is
> failing, because the generated message (sysdepds/mach/hurd/ioctl.c) is
> rejected by the Hurd term server.



Farid Hajji -- Unix Systems and Network Admin | Phone: +49-2131-67-555
Broicherdorfstr. 83, D-41564 Kaarst, Germany  | farid.hajji@ob.kamp.net
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - - -
Murphy's Law fails only when you try to demonstrate it, and thus succeeds.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]