search for: structor

...ng the guard variable. Since neither gcc nor clang implement this part of the ABI, I was thinking if there was a better way to do it. One interesting option is putting the .init_array of TU2 in the comdat. That is exactly what we do for windows. In fact, just passing -Xclang -mllvm -Xclang -enable-structor-comdat will avoids the crash in the above example. Given that this has been broken since forever, waiting a bit more for https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17350 to be fixed and then flipping -enable-structor-comdat might be the best way to fix this. With that done we can add the func...

> Unfortunately, making the comdat be for the entire function is not > conformant with the ABI, which says that you either put the variable > and its guard in different comdats or you put them in a single comdat > named for the variable.  It also doesn't actually help unless we disable > inlining. I see. Using two comdats would still cause the same problem for us, no? So the

On Nov 9, 2011, at 11:34 AM, Rafael Espíndola wrote: >>> 1) [Requires ABI change] We emit dynamic initialization code for weak globals >>> (even in TUs where static initialization is required to be performed), unless >>> we can prove that every translation unit will use static initialization. We >>> emit the global plus its guard variable as a single object so

...bjectclass_attrs: at least one mandatory attribute ('rIDNextRID') on > entry 'CN=RID Set,CN=DC3,OU=Domain Controllers,DC=example,DC=us' > wasn't specified! > [2016/09/19 09:33:03.814390, 0] > ../source4/smb_server/smb2/sesssetup.c:242(smb2srv_cleanup_session_de > structor) Verified that the rIDNextRID attribute only has an ID on one of the DC's. My understanding is that this is correct; should Samba not be attempting to replicate this attribute? Checked CN=RID Set,CN=DC3,OU=Domain Controllers,DC=example,DC=us CN=RID Set,CN=DC2,OU=Domain Controllers,DC=ex...

Package: sernet-samba-4.2.14-23.el6.x86_64 These DCs were very recently upgraded from a prior version. [2016/09/19 09:32:55.168161, 0] ../source4/libcli/smb2/signing.c:116(smb2_check_signature) Bad SMB2 signature for message of size 202 [2016/09/19 09:32:55.168511, 0] ../lib/util/util.c:559(dump_data) [0000] 77 B3 94 9B 70 78 8B 21 1E 56 D0 78 E1 80 BB 5C w...px.! .V.x...\ [2016/09/19

...t one mandatory attribute ('rIDNextRID') > > on entry 'CN=RID Set,CN=DC3,OU=Domain Controllers,DC=example,DC=us' > > wasn't specified! > > [2016/09/19 09:33:03.814390, 0] > > ../source4/smb_server/smb2/sesssetup.c:242(smb2srv_cleanup_session_de > > structor) > > Verified that the rIDNextRID attribute only has an ID on one of the > DC's. My understanding is that this is correct; should Samba not be > attempting to replicate this attribute? > > Checked > CN=RID Set,CN=DC3,OU=Domain Controllers,DC=example,DC=us > CN=RI...