FreeBSD Port: linux_base-f10-10_4

[Svyatoslav Lempert]

2012/3/10 Alexander Leidinger <Alexander at leidinger.net>:
>>
>> # ./bash
>> FATAL: kernel too old
>>
>> # file bash
>> bash: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (GNU/Linux),
>> dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, stripped
>>
>> # sysctl compat.linux.osrelease=2.6.32
>> compat.linux.osrelease: 2.6.16 -> 2.6.32
>>
>> # ./bash
>> Segmentation fault
>
> Can you please ktrace it and use linux_kdump to have a look what is the
> most likely cause of this? It would be good to know what's missing in
> the kernel.
>

ldconfig does not work too, any binary crashed, this file is first (it
called by port installation script)

# ktrace ./ldconfig
Segmentation fault

# kdump -f ktrace.out
 69021 ktrace   RET   ktrace 0
 69021 ktrace   CALL  execve(0x7fffffffed97,0x7fffffffeb30,0x7fffffffeb40)
 69021 ktrace   NAMI  "./ldconfig"
 69021 ldconfig RET   linux_olduname 0
 69021 ldconfig CALL  linux_newuname(0xffffda4a)
 69021 ldconfig RET   linux_newuname 0
 69021 ldconfig CALL  linux_brk(0)
 69021 ldconfig RET   linux_brk 135380992/0x811c000
 69021 ldconfig CALL  linux_brk(0x811cd40)
 69021 ldconfig RET   linux_brk 135384384/0x811cd40
 69021 ldconfig CALL  linux_set_thread_area(0xffffdc00)
 69021 ldconfig RET   linux_set_thread_area 0
 69021 ldconfig PSIG  SIGSEGV SIG_DFL code=0x1


>> What do you think about the CentOS? It may be more optimal to look on
>> CentOS 6 userland port?
>
> Any long-term release looks better than what we have now. A RPM based
> one (like CentOS) looks more easy to port because of the existing RPM
> infrastructure, than any non-RPM based one.

I just tested CentOS 6.2 and this system binaries work and run without
problem, but I need change compat.linux.osrelease to 2.6.18,
I'll make soon port for setup CentOS 6.x userland (like
emulators/linux_base-f10 there are all very similar) and send this as
PR.

-- 
Svyatoslav