Re: release soon?

[Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat dot com>]

On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 13:41 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > I did a full make installcheck against systemtap git (7c2136cf) with
> > elfutils git (2fb9051e) on i386 fedora 10 and x86_64 on rhel 5.3 and
> > didn't see any regressions compared with a systemtap build against the
> > system installed elfutils (0.140 for fedora 10, 0.137 for rhel 5.3).
> 
> So...did that verify that the bugs you've reported were actually fixed, and
> not just worked around or not happening to come up?  IIRC some of your
> issues were seen on x86_64 and not i386.

Both issues triggered originally on i386 against libc. The systemtap
testsuite doesn't explicitly contain tests for that particular situation
(since that would require testers to install all debuginfo, but I am
looking into adding something anyway and make them untested if debuginfo
isn't found for system libraries used in the test). The code does
contain extra workarounds and sanity checks to not trip over these
issues.

The dwfl_module_build_id workaround is guarded with a _ELFUTILS_PREREQ,
a manual test seems to confirm that against 0.141 we don't need to
adjust the returned build_id_vaddr.

The dwfl_module_getsym issue is guarded by two extra sanity checks
against the module base. Removing those and just keeping the checks
for !(sym.st_shndx == SHN_UNDEF || sym.st_shndx == SHN_ABS || shndxp ==
-1) and running against the problematic libc instance seems to indicate
that also works correctly against 0.141.

Cheers,

Mark