jbauernberger at gmx-ag.de
Tue Apr 23 17:18:34 UTC 2002
First sorry or the broken thread by me not putting a subject on the last
mail. Finger must have slipped on hte send button ...
On Monday 22 April 2002 11:38, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote:
> > Also, I have never come across a sigbus in my code before so
> > I tried to
> > compile
> > it under libc6 to see if it would make a difference. The
> > result on libc6 is
> > a segv.
> This puzzles me a bit, as SIGBUS is sent when two things happen
> at the same time:
> 1 - a memory value is fetched which size is not aligned with the
> bus (eg, a 32 bit value not aligned on 32 bits)
> 2 - the CPU can't do two reads to rebuild the value
> i386 can do step 2, so there should never be SIGBUSes on i386.
Didn't Netscape 4.x have big problems with SIGBUS when migrating it from
libc5 to libc6 on Linux. I remember seeing it several times before.
> Have a look at your headers, maybe SIGBUS has a value which is
> also allocated to another signal, and this might tip you on
> what's happening ?
I looked into it, but headers on both systems seem to be in sync with
what the values of SIGBUS and SIGSEGV are concerend.
On libc5 signal.h includes <linux/signal.h> which defines SIGBUS as 7
and SIGSEGV as 11.
On libc6 signal.h includes <bits/signum.h> which does the same.
> Sorry for the HTML, can't stop it :/
No Problem :-)
> Vincent Penquerc'h
PGP Public Key:
More information about the linuxCprogramming