Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] [sm-discuss] pentium-m arch + java.

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Javier Vasquez <j.e.vasquez.v AT gmail.com>
  • To: "sm, discuss" <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] [sm-discuss] pentium-m arch + java.
  • Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 20:50:26 -0600

On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Javier Vasquez
<j.e.vasquez.v AT gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:22 AM, Sukneet Basuta <sukneet AT gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:47 AM, Javier Vasquez
>>> ...
>>
>> Is there a --without-ecj configure option? If so try that. However, it
>> could be that javac is hanging or something, given your error with
>> java.
>
> Not from prior gcc with java, and I also dispelled the icedtea7 to see
> if that was causing problems, and mad sure there were no left overs.
> I had already jdk7-bin dispelled some time back, when I was able to
> cast icedtea7 some time back...
>
> So, it doesn't sound like it to me...
>
>>> I'm really clueless. Any hint is helpful. BTW, I didn't find any
>>> native x86-32 arch, only x86-64 with whether 64 or 32 bits, but that's
>>> not x86-32. So pentium-m is the closer arch to what the CPU is:
>>
>> native-x86_64-32 is what you want. I'm not sure why its labelled as
>> such, but I suppose it's because -march=native doesn't work on all
>> architectures. However, it should work for all x86 architectures, as
>> stated in the description of the archspec.
>
> OK, it didn't sound to me like it was x86-32, just x86-64 running with
> the new 32 bits API, :-) I should learn not to make suppositions, :-)
>
> OK, it'll take me quiet a while, but I'll try re-building again then.
> If that worked out on x86-64, I'll suppose it'll work on x86-32 (I
> know, another supposition), :-)
>
> I bought more memory (2G), so I hope that helps in the near future,
> but not right now...


OK, this is too weird.

When the arch was i686, then I could install jdk7-bin, and make it
work. And I could compile/install icedtea7 as well with no problem.

Now, 1st with pentium-m, and then with native, the binary versions
don-t work, and I can't compile icedtea7...

I believe the arch has to do with it, but I have no idea how to work
around it, and I really don't want to recompile glibc, gcc and the
like...

See:

% ls -l /lib/libc.so.6
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Feb 1 16:00 /lib/libc.so.6 -> libc-2.16.so

% file /lib/libc-2.16.so
/lib/libc-2.16.so: ELF 32-bit LSB shared object, Intel 80386, version
1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.0,
not stripped

% ldd /lib/libc-2.16.so
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb761c000)
linux-gate.so.1 (0xb761b000)

Using the binary jre7 from oracle (32 bits), not even jdk:

% java -version
#
# A fatal error has been detected by the Java Runtime Environment:
#
# SIGSEGV (0xb) at pc=0xb75d4acb, pid=16305, tid=3065809728
#
# JRE version: 7.0_10-b18
# Java VM: Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (23.6-b04 mixed mode linux-x86 )
# Problematic frame:
# C [libc.so.6+0x7bacb]

Then it hangs...

Does it look like java is expecting 0xb75d4acb instead of 0xb761b000?

% file /usr/lib/oracle/jre/bin/java
/usr/lib/oracle/jre/bin/java: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386,
version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux
2.6.9, BuildID[sha1]=0518f8b465780a64d721c738347ff9453c3ed085, not
stripped

% ldd /usr/lib/oracle/jre/bin/java
linux-gate.so.1 (0xb77c3000)
libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0xb7793000)
libjli.so =>
/usr/lib/oracle/jre1.7.0_10/bin/../lib/i386/jli/libjli.so (0xb777f000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0xb777a000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb75f1000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb77c4000)

I can't see if there's a gross mismatch, but perhaps some else sees better,
:-)

BTW, java (and dependencies) is the only thing I'm missing to get back
on this machine...

Thanks,

--
Javier.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page