Summary: | dev-lang/erlang-12.2.5 QA: usr/lib/erlang/erts*/bin/beam* contain executable stack | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Lars Strojny <lars> |
Component: | New packages | Assignee: | Christian Faulhammer (RETIRED) <fauli> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | QA | CC: | lang-misc+disabled, pesa |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
URL: | http://www.erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-bugs/2008-December/001123.html | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: |
/var/tmp/portage/dev-lang/erlang-12.2.5/temp/scanelf-execstack.log
Fixes the executable stacks on amd64 |
Description
Lars Strojny
2008-11-30 00:27:16 UTC
The mask is making the warning go away...but is it actually a fix? This should be reported upstream. Would you be so kind to do that. If not, please at least add your scanelf log file so I can do the report. Created attachment 174492 [details]
/var/tmp/portage/dev-lang/erlang-12.2.5/temp/scanelf-execstack.log
Scanelf log. I tried reporting the bug myself but I was told that OTP only has a
private bugtracker. So maybe one should send a mail to erlang-bugs, but I'm not
sure how upstream handles bug reports.
(In reply to comment #3) > Created an attachment (id=174492) [edit] > /var/tmp/portage/dev-lang/erlang-12.2.5/temp/scanelf-execstack.log > > Scanelf log. I tried reporting the bug myself but I was told that OTP only has > a > private bugtracker. So maybe one should send a mail to erlang-bugs, but I'm not > sure how upstream handles bug reports. When I had a more reliable internet connection, I used to report all our patches to erlang-bugs mailing list...they reacted fast and in a friendly manner. Just try it. :) Mail sent. (In reply to comment #5) > Mail sent. Unluckily upstream does not react...we will wait until after the holidays. This issue is caused by hand-written assembly code without a .note.GNU-stack section. Created attachment 178130 [details, diff]
Fixes the executable stacks on amd64
This patch can be easily extended to fix the other arches (arm, ppc, sparc, x86), too.
(In reply to comment #7) > This issue is caused by hand-written assembly code without a .note.GNU-stack > section. Is this taken from upstream? Or do they at least know about this fix? (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #7) > > This issue is caused by hand-written assembly code without a .note.GNU-stack > > section. > > Is this taken from upstream? Or do they at least know about this fix? > No, the patch is mine. I haven't sent it upstream yet... (In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > (In reply to comment #7) > > > This issue is caused by hand-written assembly code without a .note.GNU-stack > > > section. > > > > Is this taken from upstream? Or do they at least know about this fix? > > > > No, the patch is mine. I haven't sent it upstream yet... Could you please do so? If you are afraid of it or don't have the time, I can do it, of course. And we got an answer: http://www.erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-patches/2009-January/000363.html Perfect. So we will wait for R13. (In reply to comment #13) > And we got an answer: > http://www.erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-patches/2009-January/000363.html > > Perfect. So we will wait for R13. > Could you do a revbump with upstream patch for exec stack issues? http://www.erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-patches/2009-February/000370.html And while at it, could you also include the following patch which fixes a segfault on amd64 with hipe? (suggested by upstream) http://www.erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-bugs/2009-January/001173.html Thanks. Both fixes added. Closing. Please test and report back. (In reply to comment #15) > Both fixes added. Closing. Please test and report back. > Exec stacks are gone and the segfault is fixed. Thank you very much! |