<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.10.1">
</HEAD>
<BODY>
I find this failure fascinating...<BR>
Clearly my FC-5 platform will not permit jnos compilation because of infrastructure change over FC-4 - glibc.<BR>
The failure is central to the kernel context switch design by Phil KA9Q and Rob PE1CHL on multiple platforms - mine Linux.<BR>
Present jnos2 is to support DOS, MAC, Linux, (SUN?), all requiring adjustment for library support details.<BR>
Future support for Windows (without DOS constraints) may introduce another variation?<BR>
<BR>
Those of you who modify the source are truly gifted with the ability to juggle. <BR>
Thankfully pre-compiled modules are (more?) tolerant of variation...<BR>
I can hope the glibc design change only requires a SMALL modification to jnos source - I'm sad I can't do it myself.<BR>
Yet I find __GNU_LIBRARY__ is deprecated in favor of __GLIBC__ as an example, and that's only one of many.<BR>
Certainly the desire to run jnos on top of DOS the old with the same source as Linux the new causes stress.<BR>
<BR>
Those of us who apply the code can not demand that jnos work on just any platform, we must fit within constraints.<BR>
As for myself, I'll be rolling jnos compilation back to another older platform for the time being (after installing gcc).<BR>
That will be my approach to remaining on the leading (not bleeding) edge of jnos development.<BR>
In addition - It makes little sense to fill up this reflector talking to myself...<BR>
<BR>
On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 19:04 -0400, George (Skip) VerDuin wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">OK - I am over my head and can not repair the FC-5 compile failure...</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">It occurs only when ifdefined linux and __GNU_LIBRARY__ > 1 </FONT><BR>
<BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">I have found FC-5 did change to gcc 4.1.0-3.i386 and (buggy) glibc 2.4-4.i686.</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">A design change intentionally no longer defines JB_SP etc.</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">It sounds like setjump & jmpbuf are modified (may be depr</FONT>e<FONT COLOR="#000000">cated?) and need to be replaced with __builtin_frame_address (etc..) for security?</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">I looked around gcc documentation for a while and did not land on the answer.</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">This smells like a non-trivial change for linux platform memory management some time?</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">See:</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000"><A HREF="http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2006-April/msg00571.html">http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2006-April/msg00571.html</A></FONT><BR>
<BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">On the memory subject - jnos log reports that jnos has 3.05GB available memory...</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">Can that be intended?</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">It could be right if jnos augments swap space by also using free space on the root (maybe /tmp?).</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">Come on recursive qsort - I dare you to try to use up 3gb...! (of course I won't wait all night...)</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">Thrashing comes to mind.</FONT><BR>
<BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">In any case, Maiko thanks for putting FC-5 on your fix-it list.</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">I'll be OK with pre-compiled executables for quite a while since it has sufficient features for my needs as distributed.</FONT><BR>
<BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 09:22 -0500, George (Skip) VerDuin wrote:</FONT><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">Greetings,</FONT><BR>
<BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">This is my recent experience that seems worth sharing at an early stage...</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">The jnos executeable from FC-4 seems normal in operation over the past 24hrs.</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">The jnos compile "make" fails in ksubr.c over "JB_SP", "JB_BP", "JB_PC", undeclared.</FONT><BR>
<BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">Sorry - no solution at this moment.</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">I might suggest to avoid FC-5 development until the differences become clear?</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">Something in "#define ... JB_SP ..." has changed in FC-5 over FC-4.</FONT><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">I will follow up...</FONT><BR>
<TABLE CELLSPACING="0" CELLPADDING="0" WIDTH="100%">
<TR>
<TD>
<BR>
73<BR>
de Skip k8rra k<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
<PRE>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">_______________________________________________</FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">nos-bbs mailing list</FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#000000"><A HREF="mailto:nos-bbs@lists.tapr.org">nos-bbs@lists.tapr.org</A></FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#000000"><A HREF="https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nos-bbs">https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nos-bbs</A></FONT>
</PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<TABLE CELLSPACING="0" CELLPADDING="0" WIDTH="100%">
<TR>
<TD>
<BR>
73<BR>
de Skip k8rra k<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
<PRE>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">_______________________________________________</FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">nos-bbs mailing list</FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#000000"><A HREF="mailto:nos-bbs@lists.tapr.org">nos-bbs@lists.tapr.org</A></FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#000000"><A HREF="https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nos-bbs">https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nos-bbs</A></FONT>
</PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<TABLE CELLSPACING="0" CELLPADDING="0" WIDTH="100%">
<TR>
<TD>
<BR>
73<BR>
de Skip k8rra k<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
</BODY>
</HTML>