[Bug libc/9685] __have_{sock_cloexec,pipe2} checks not valid with linux headers older than 2.6.27

[Bug libc/9685] __have_{sock_cloexec,pipe2} checks not valid with linux headers older than 2.6.27

[vapier at gentoo dot org]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9685

Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #7 from Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org> 2012-08-18 04:37:00 UTC ---
committed @ http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2012-08/msg00424.html

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug libc/9685] __have_{sock_cloexec,pipe2} checks not valid with linux headers older than 2.6.27

[fweimer at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9685

Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|                            |security-

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug libc/9685] __have_{sock_cloexec,pipe2} checks not valid with linux headers older than 2.6.27

[vapier at gentoo dot org]

------- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org  2009-02-15 21:44 -------
when i think about it some more, your latest statements are irrelevant.  the
problem here is that if the __ASSUME_xxx defines are not defined, then glibc
falls back to the runtime test.  as i illustrated in the original summary, this
will create a broken glibc if the linux-headers do not contain the pipe2 syscall
number.  the arch in question is irrelevant.  that means that the linux-headers
have to be very recent (and in some cases, not even available today let alone at
the time of the glibc-2.9 release).

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9685

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug libc/9685] __have_{sock_cloexec,pipe2} checks not valid with linux headers older than 2.6.27

[vapier at gentoo dot org]

------- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org  2009-02-07 06:28 -------
umm, there's two parts here: first, the original report where glibc is broken on
*all* arches, even when you want to put on your "supported" goggles.  second:
you're turning the __ASSUME_XXX code into "only works on supported arches".  yes,
other arches can disable the __ASSUME_XXX stuff completely, but that sort of
defeats the entire purpose of it.

even if you choose to wrongly ignore the second part (which i imagine you will),
there's still the matter of the first

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|WONTFIX                     |


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9685

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug libc/9685] __have_{sock_cloexec,pipe2} checks not valid with linux headers older than 2.6.27

[drepper at redhat dot com]

------- Additional Comments From drepper at redhat dot com  2009-02-07 05:20 -------
You're wrong.  Architectures simply have to define the __ASSUME_* macros when
all the features they represent are available.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9685

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug libc/9685] __have_{sock_cloexec,pipe2} checks not valid with linux headers older than 2.6.27

[vapier at gentoo dot org]

------- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org  2008-12-29 09:06 -------
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/kernel-features.h omits __sh__ from the list as it does
have pipe2 in linux-2.6.27, but that's a different issue

the point of the way glibc is laid out is for arches to control features like
this.  by binding sock_cloexec and pipe2 together without any sort of recourse,
you're basically saying that all other arches will be broken and there's nothing
they can do about it (regardless of whether they're in the "main" set of ports). 
if you want to add another define like __ASSUME_SOCK_CLOEXEC_AND_PIPE2 and key
the __have_pipe2->__have_sock_cloexec define off of that vs dedicated storage,
then that would work as the other arches would be able to disable it.

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9685

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug libc/9685] __have_{sock_cloexec,pipe2} checks not valid with linux headers older than 2.6.27

[drepper at redhat dot com]

------- Additional Comments From drepper at redhat dot com  2008-12-28 06:04 -------
The only architectures of interest are those in the main tree.  Anything else
must be handled elsewhere.  So, which architecture do you think doesn't work?

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |WAITING


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9685

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug libc/9685] __have_{sock_cloexec,pipe2} checks not valid with linux headers older than 2.6.27

[vapier at gentoo dot org]

------- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org  2008-12-27 19:52 -------
further, assuming sock_cloexec and pipe2 support were added at the same time is
invalid for all arches, so they'll need separate storage anyways.  the assumption
is only valid for a subset of architectures.

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9685

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.