execvpe and glibc 2.10

[Martin Buchholz]

Joe, thanks for the review.

I've pushed fixes for this problem to openjdk6 and openjdk7/tl

Martin

On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 21:22, Joseph D. Darcy<Joe.Darcy at sun.com> wrote:
> Martin Buchholz wrote:
>>
>> Of course, it's all my fault.
>> First, for having used a symbol that libc implementers are likely to add.
>> Second, for actually asking glibc implementers to add that very symbol.
>> Third, for forgetting that this is an issue in openjdk6 as well.
>>
>> Anyways, I intend to commit these patches to their respective forests:
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk6/rename-execvpe/
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk7/rename-execvpe/
>>
>> As ever, we need a Sun bug (could Michael or Joe file it?):
>>
>> Synopsis: Rename execvpe to avoid symbol clash with glibc 2.10.
>> Description:
>> glibc 2.10 added the long-awaited "missing link" function execvpe
>> (thank you!  No really!)
>> But the JDK already has a function of that name, which needs renaming,
>> to avoid a compile time failure in UNIXProcess_md.c
>> Evaluation: Yup
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>
> I've filed bug 6866719 and I approve the fix going back into 7 and OpenJDK
> 6.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -Joe
>
>> Martin
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 08:24, Andrew John
>> Hughes<gnu_andrew at member.fsf.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> 2009/7/28 Martin Buchholz <martinrb at google.com>:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 06:08, Michael McMahon<Michael.McMahon at sun.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2009/7/28 Michael McMahon <Michael.McMahon at sun.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2009/7/9 Martin Buchholz <martinrb at google.com>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> rename-execvpe is the one I'm particularly concerned about.  It's a
>>>>>> trivial patch, but without it, OpenJDK builds are going to start
>>>>>> failing as distros move to the new glibc (e.g. Fedora 12).  It's
>>>>>> already an issue for users of Fedora rawhide.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok. Maybe we can push rename-execvpe and RESTARTABLE first.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> RESTARTABLE depends on vfork-exec, and I would not like to do
>>>> the work to reorder them.
>>>>
>>>> Changes to fork-exec are always high-risk,
>>>> and I would like to see some more testing on these
>>>> before committing to openjdk proper.
>>>> That could be done by having icedtea7 import them,
>>>> and by having Michael or another Sun person run them
>>>> through Sun testing.
>>>>
>>>> There are more changes to fork-exec to come,
>>>> although they will probably not affect the average Linux user's
>>>> experience.
>>>>
>>>> Michael and I have been doing other things the past few weeks.
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure, we can do some testing with IcedTea7 after the release for M4,
>>> which should be sometime in the next week or so.
>>>
>>> In the meantime, can you or me push the execvpe cleanup to the 6 and 7
>>> forests (tl presumably for 7)?  Or is there a further issue there?
>>> You've not mentioned it in either reply.
>>>
>>> Joe, I assume this is okay for 6?  Without it the build is broken on
>>> newer distributions.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> --
>>> Andrew :-)
>>>
>>> Free Java Software Engineer
>>> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
>>>
>>> Support Free Java!
>>> Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
>>> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
>>> http://openjdk.java.net
>>>
>>> PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
>>> Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8
>>>
>>>
>
>