RE: PowerPC paxtest results w/ gcc-4.1

2006-08-14 Thread Paul Mackerras
Matt Sealey writes: > Book I compatible PowerPC's have had a "no-executable" bit in > the page protection flags since the dark ages.. see page 7-38 > and 7-39 of the 'Programming Environments Manual for 32-Bit > Microprocessors'.. this document predates even the G3. What are you referring to? I

Policy Violation

2006-08-14 Thread alertsender
The following message sent by this account has violated system policy: Connection From: 10.60.1.230 From: debian-powerpc@lists.debian.org To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 09:46:26 +0900 Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details The following violations were detected: --- Sc

Re: [PATCH] no-execute -- please test

2006-08-14 Thread Paul Mackerras
Albert Cahalan writes: > The first is to avoid taking the initial fault on the segment > which contains the instruction pointer. Good idea. > The second is to avoid cache or TLB invalidates or flushes > in certain circumstances. OpenBSD developers report that > this type of optimization is of gr

Libpam-mount and xscreensaver

2006-08-14 Thread leandro noferini
Ciao a tutti, I have a problem using xscreensaver together with libpam-mount: when I try to lock the display I cannot login no more because the password is not recognized. Does anybody else found this problem? The manteiners of the two packages are in bcc. -- Ciao leandro Un esteso e "norm

Therion builds need a kick?

2006-08-14 Thread Wookey
I notice that therion has been in state building on alpha (goedel) and powerpc (voltaire) for over a month. It has built OK on the other arches. http://buildd.debian.org/~jeroen/status/package.php?p=therion&a=alpha Can someone see what's wrong please? (and cc:me - I'm not on these lists). Wookey

Re: [PATCH] no-execute -- please test

2006-08-14 Thread Michel Dänzer
On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 12:08 -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote: > The module failing is not actually the problem. > I get GLcore failing with a numeric error message > (grrr... like an original Mac or Amiga, or LILO) What more explanation than 'undefined symbol' do you need? You're not supposed to load G

Re: [PATCH] no-execute -- please test

2006-08-14 Thread Albert Cahalan
The module failing is not actually the problem. I get GLcore failing with a numeric error message (grrr... like an original Mac or Amiga, or LILO) even when things work OK. Messages from the failing situation: # cat Xorg.0.log.old | egrep 'EE|WW|!!|[abcdf-zA-Z]GL|gl|Gl|GL[a-zA-Z]|Chipset' Curren

Re: [PATCH] no-execute -- please test

2006-08-14 Thread Albert Cahalan
On 8/14/06, Michel Dänzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 23:20 -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > If you want heap protection, change VM_DATA_DEFAULT_FLAGS32 > in include/asm-powerpc/page.h to be like VM_STACK_DEFAULT_FLAGS. > I'd love to hear if anybody can get X to start with th

Re: PowerPC paxtest results w/ gcc-4.1

2006-08-14 Thread Kumar Gala
On Aug 14, 2006, at 7:17 AM, Matt Sealey wrote: That looks like a 64-bit system, which doesn't have the granularity problem anyway. 32-bit powerpc seems to be decent. The heap shares with the executable itself, and of course there is the yucky 2 GB limit. One thing I'm curious about, has a

make `caps_lock' behave as `control' ?

2006-08-14 Thread William
Hi, Tried various ways to make `caps_lock' key behave as `control' on my ibook G4, but never succeed. I've made `caps_lock' report as Control_L in xev, but seems it still has no effect. Any ideas? kernel version: 2.6.15.5 xorg Version: 1:7.0.22 -- William -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL P

RE: PowerPC paxtest results w/ gcc-4.1

2006-08-14 Thread Matt Sealey
> That looks like a 64-bit system, which doesn't have the > granularity problem anyway. 32-bit powerpc seems to be > decent. The heap shares with the executable itself, and of > course there is the yucky 2 GB limit. One thing I'm curious about, has anyone EVER made a system which actually use

RE: PowerPC paxtest results w/ gcc-4.1

2006-08-14 Thread Matt Sealey
> Of course, that won't make all that much difference on your > Cube, because the G4 CPU doesn't have hardware support for > non-executable pages (any readable page is executable) I don't think this is true? Book I compatible PowerPC's have had a "no-executable" bit in the page protection fla

Re: [PATCH] no-execute -- please test

2006-08-14 Thread Michel Dänzer
On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 23:20 -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > If you want heap protection, change VM_DATA_DEFAULT_FLAGS32 > in include/asm-powerpc/page.h to be like VM_STACK_DEFAULT_FLAGS. > I'd love to hear if anybody can get X to start with this change. > For me (Xorg w/ ATI) a module load fails.

Re: [PATCH] no-execute -- please test

2006-08-14 Thread Andreas Schwab
Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Albert Cahalan writes: > >> If you want heap protection, change VM_DATA_DEFAULT_FLAGS32 >> in include/asm-powerpc/page.h to be like VM_STACK_DEFAULT_FLAGS. >> I'd love to hear if anybody can get X to start with this change. > > In general I would expect

Re: Bug#382129: Beta3 won't boot on OldWorld PowerPC Mac

2006-08-14 Thread Rick Thomas
Hi Brian, It's good to know I'm not completely alone! If you have any ideas, please share them. Maybe I can try them myself. Enjoy! Rick On Aug 14, 2006, at 12:39 AM, brian wrote: i also have a g3 like ricks but it is not transportable, sorry... (but yah i got the same results as him). i