Re: Pike on OpenBSD

On Mon, 2 Jan 2017, Bernd Schoeller wrote:

> Thank you for the feedback.
>
> On 02/01/17 10:38, Henrik Grubbström wrote:
>>  Correct fix. Seems I fixed it in Pike 8.1 ~ one and a half years ago,
>>  but forgot to backport it to Pike 8.0.
>>
>>  Fixed.
> Great, thanks for the confirmation.
>>
>>  Hmm... Why is it using tpike in post-modules? You ought to have a full
>>  pike binary at that time. I suspect that you've got several failures
>>  some of which are with the full pike binary.
>
> The output of running gmake here:
>
> https://www.fams.de/bernte/gmake-out.txt
>
> It currently looks all sound to me: making modules, then compiling and 
> linking tpike, then making post_modules. I do not see a try to build 'pike'. 
> I don't see any failures, just warning by the compiler.

Ah, the configure output explains it;

> checking SO... so
> checking LDSHARED... gcc -Wl,-Bshareable
> checking CCSHARED... checking -fPIC... yes
>  -fPIC
> checking LINKFORSHARED... -Wl,-E
> checking -static-libgcc... yes
> checking if dynamic loading works... no
                                        ^^

So for some reason dlopen() et al don't work as intended, and thus
you get a pike with only static modules, which means that the main
pike binary won't get compiled until after post_modules.

/home/schoelle/Code/Pike-v8.0.388/build/openbsd-6.0-amd64/config.log
should give a hint about why dlopen() failed.

>>  Anyway, the problematic pointer looks like it could have been valid at
>>  some point in time.
>>
>>  It looks like the crash is during initialization of the master object.
>>
>>  Please try running
>>
>>    ./pike -t2
>>
>>  and provide the last ~20 lines of the trace.
> As I don't have a running 'pike', I assume this can be done on 'tpike' as 
> well (my understanding is that tpike is a bootstrap only pike interpreter 
> with reduced functionality. Is that correct?).

Correct.

-- 
Henrik Grubbström					[email protected]
Roxen Internet Software AB