search for: libcs

Hello user-list, Here is my pb : I have a brand new debian Etch with all updates installed on a DELL PE SC430 with a Pentium D 930 (3Ghz, Intel-VT, EMT64) I''ve downloaded xen-3.3 and tried to install with /*"The Perfect Xen 3.1.0 Setup For Debian Etch" */howto. But when i run the the "make world" I have an error with the studbom compilation : /Dans le fichier

I have found that pid provider can not create memcpy:return probe for 64bit process on snv_110. For example, the pid is 10603, I will have following output for dtrace command: #dtrace -n pid10603:libc.so.1:memcpy:return dtrace: invalid probe specifier pid10603:libc.so.1:memcpy:return: probe description pid10603:libc.so.1:memcpy:return does not match any probes This just

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 9:29 AM JF Bastien <jfbastien at apple.com> wrote: > > I think I now understand some of the disconnect you and I are having, and I think some of the pushback you’re getting from the community is the same. You’re talking about where you want to start with an LLVM libc. Many in the community (myself included) want to understand where we’ll get with this libc. At

Somehow I wish not all parts of a libc but parts that can be provided without a JavaScript wrapper for .wasm can be provided from llvm's libc (leaving a stab implementation for the rest like file system). I've put together a minimal libc on [1] so using a 26kb .wasm binary file one can decode both PNG and JPG using this [2] simple to integrate JavaScript code, can be easily ported in other

Hello again, I would like to announce that we now have dedicated mailing lists for the llvm-libc project: 1. libc-dev - https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libc-dev 2. libc-commits - https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libc-commits A brief README.txt and LICENSE.txt have been added: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/master/libc I will soon share or put out

Hello, make check on Solaris 10 throws a segmentation fault. The error is independent of the compiler (SunStudio/GCC) and processor architecture (SPARC/x86) and 32 or 64 bit binary. Dovecot Version: 2.2.10 OS: Solaris 10/SPARC & x86 SunStudion Compiler cc: Sun C 5.10 SunOS_sparc Patch 141861-10 2012/11/07 GCC gcc version 3.4.3 (csl-sol210-3_4-branch+sol_rpath) The error occurs first

http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.15.tar.gz http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.15.tar.gz.sig Some small fixes and changes to v2.2.14. This release is mainly in the hope that it could still make it into the next Debian stable instead of v2.2.14 - mainly because of a couple of new assert crashes that started happening in v2.2.14 and should be fixed now. * Plugins can now print

http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.15.tar.gz http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.15.tar.gz.sig Some small fixes and changes to v2.2.14. This release is mainly in the hope that it could still make it into the next Debian stable instead of v2.2.14 - mainly because of a couple of new assert crashes that started happening in v2.2.14 and should be fixed now. * Plugins can now print

I too am having this problem reported by Frank Hoonhout. Asterisk runs fine for a few minutes and then stops accepting new calls. (I have a standalone server with SIP phones and I'm not doing any external registration). Asterisk CVS-04/07/03-09:28:50 0x420e0037 in poll () from /lib/i686/libc.so.6 (gdb) info threads 16 Thread 14351 (LWP 7258) 0x420e187e in select () from

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 22 November 2015 at 14:32, Brian Cain <brian.cain at gmail.com> wrote: > > AFAICT it's an OpenMP link error (that I got when running > "test-release.sh" > > with -openmp). > > Right. In that case, don't worry too much. > > The default release

I foresee problems with this on both Windows and non-Windows. A typical libc implementation has a lot of internal state that is shared across API boundaries in a way that is considered an implementation detail. So making assumptions about which state is shared and which isn't is going to be a problem. How do you guarantee that if you implement method A and forward method B, that B will

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 11:49 PM Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > What happened since you committed the doc? Is this now graduated from a "proposal to start a project" to a project? I think it has now. > Is there any update to be made to the doc: http://llvm.org/docs//Proposals/LLVMLibC.html ? Not sure what kind of update you have in mind.

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 22 November 2015 at 03:59, Brian Cain <brian.cain at gmail.com> wrote: > > Should I expect the "-openmp" to work for this RC? > > Only if it worked before on the target you're building to in 3.7.0. > Ok, I'll check if I can get it to work on 3.7.0. > >

The main concern I have is that Windows is so different from everything else that there is a high likelihood of decisions being baked in early on that make things very difficult for people to come along later and contribute a Windows implementation. This happened with sanitizers for example (lack of support for weak functions on Windows), LLDB (posix api calls scattered throughout the codebase),

[root at mems ~]# valgrind --leak-check=full --show-leak-kinds=all -v ping google.com ==3135== Memcheck, a memory error detector ==3135== Copyright (C) 2002-2013, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al. ==3135== Using Valgrind-3.10.0 and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info ==3135== Command: ping google.com ==3135== --3135-- Valgrind options: --3135-- --leak-check=full --3135--

Hello LLVM Developers, Within Google, we have a growing range of needs that existing libc implementations don't quite address. This is pushing us to start working on a new libc implementation. Informal conversations with others within the LLVM community has told us that a libc in LLVM is actually a broader need, and we are increasingly consolidating our toolchains around LLVM. Hence, we

Hi, I would like to avoid the following situation: SRC has: -rwxr-xr-x 1 root staff 1596328 2005-04-29 17:34 libc-2.3.3.so -rw-r--r-- 1 root staff 193 2005-04-29 17:34 libc.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root staff 13 2007-02-05 15:06 libc.so.6 -> libc-2.3.3.so DEST has: -rwxr-xr-x 1 dale dale 1558836 2008-02-07 12:25 libc-2.3.6.so -rw-r--r-- 1 dale dale 193 2008-02-07 11:46 libc.so lrwxrwxrwx

I wrote a simple c programme and do some dtrace test. the progromme shows below(write.c): /////////////////////////////// #include<stdio.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <fcntl.h> char *value="hello,my name is wanjm\n"; void main() { int fd; fd=open("/export/home/wanjm/temp/read.txt",O_RDWR|O_CREAT); while(1) {

Hi all, I am working on a bug, which running PLR on HAWQ. The process hung and can't be terminated. >From my investigation, it seems signal handler 'Rf_onsigusr1' trigger a malloc/free deadlock. The calling stack is below. Thread 1 (Thread 0x7f4c93af48e0 (LWP 431263)): #0 0x00007f4c9015805e in __lll_lock_wait_private () from /lib64/libc.so.6 #1 0x00007f4c900dd16b in

> On 6/25/19 7:22 PM, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev wrote: > > I foresee problems with this on both Windows and non-Windows. A > > typical libc implementation has a lot of internal state that is shared > > across API boundaries in a way that is considered an implementation > > detail. So making assumptions about which state is shared and which > > isn't is