[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/12/11]
Peter da Silva wrote: >>So what does "invalid operation" mean, besides the very act of running >>g++ under RHEL? > > > I guess it's probably errno 22: > > 22 EINVAL Invalid argument. Some invalid argument was supplied. (For > example, specifying an undefined signal to a signal(3) function > or a kill(2) system call). > > Something in the object module is confusing GCC. Right. That's why it fails when I pass the module. What I would like to know is (1) why can't gcc on RHEL work with an ELF shared object compiled on SuSE, although nm, objdump & dlopen/dlsym on RHEL all agree that the object is kosher and (2) which function got which invalid argument. Telling that some argument to some function is wrong is less than helpful. > > >>P.P.S. why does RHEL (or RHEL's tcsh, or some other sub-sucker of a larger >>sucker) lists terminated jobs after the command following a kill command, and >>not when they are actually terminated? > > > Because it finds out that they've terminated when it performs a wait() system > call, and it does that after running a command. Right. They made me implement a Unix-like shell once, so I happen to know the sacred protocols of Unix job control, so I've guessed the scenario you suggest. I couldn't care less as a user though. As a user, I like the behavior of tcsh@SuSE (and all other shells I've used) - saying that it killed something right after it did so. Why is tcsh@RHEL different? > > >>P.P.P.S. why is tcsh located in different places in SuSE and RHEL? > > > Because Linux is not an operating system. It's a kernel. A Linux distribution > is a Linux kernel and a collection of packages, and it's up to the distribution > to decide what packages are there and where they go. > > Why do you care where tcsh is anyway? > > Right. I know that. I know that it can look whatever it likes because that's the way they distribute it and still have Linux somewhere in it's guts. I'm not saying that either RHEL or SuSE should avoid using the name "Linux". I'm saying that since they ship two similar things, it would be very /nice/ of them to avoid introducing inconsistencies for the sake of it. And the piece of shite called tcsh should lay where it was dropped the first time someone decided to litter a storage device with it's copy. I don't care where tcsh is. The scripts running it with #!/bin/tcsh or the like do care, though. I manually change that to #!/bin/env tcsh each time I bump into it - hasn't failed me yet, although according to some replies I got here, it surely can fail.There's stuff above here
Generated at 22:02 on 27 Dec 2006 by mariachi 0.52