On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:46:48 +0100 Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi! > > > > In my usual dither, I'm rather hoping Arjan will have a clear > > > answer. > > > > > > setarch works. If the apps come in source form they need fixing > > anyway (since I'd not be surprised of current gcc reorders > > variables), if not.. we only have 2 cases, the other case was the > > build process of emacs (which got fixed 5 years ago). > > uemacs ... broken with randomization > colums, sss ... local programs, broken with randomization > procinfo ... broken, randomization makes it die sooner. > mikmod ... broken with randomization > bsdsed ... broken with randomization > ... > Should I test few more? ok throw that idea out of the window then the combo of a config option + sysctl sounds the right way forward then ;( Unless there's a way we can make sys_brk() detect this kind of behavior somehow... we could track per process if brk(0) was called, and if not, do something fancy to work around stuff? -- If you want to reach me at my work email, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
