From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OiddY-0008Bz-Vf for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 10 Aug 2010 01:28:17 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C41FEE0907; Tue, 10 Aug 2010 01:27:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qw0-f53.google.com (mail-qw0-f53.google.com [209.85.216.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EEE2E0907 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2010 01:27:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qwb7 with SMTP id 7so7205940qwb.40 for ; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 18:27:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=Rx+MUNTmjtjGdjAIlCeIXpjVcK0XmDu1ZoFL/Shi84Y=; b=KCnPZvMXc0fxGVNb0cZflW2C+Cj3PXuJJx0uc8aBFQU6ZgTMXBmBdg0zk3kLNOFWHM ZBsXeJfjEspU14K1pMxCwl/Q18M7sWDlShcj3yLrdW1IotTrdbzff5aT8T6sczvTamTT /enA/dRdU4c9OQjXYpLhDLn69JbKUyIxezLK0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=qfzKQNa1YUS43xR9Znz+a8tdzPIEO6lud2AOyEohdNgxMHFfU8nNU37Ikg4HkgblU3 mGeRnj4AicgyXvaKOsehxpMIwjpu5De7mRZD0IH0Baa3yWrNZCi39+yeKkMSj7HbvnYi 9rIgvoe6rlNrYWvPGvsHH3pI/qvwJFyfSNgn0= Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.189.143 with SMTP id de15mr7850969qcb.35.1281403672125; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 18:27:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.249.213 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Aug 2010 18:27:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 18:27:52 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: GDBM incompatibility woes; any experts out there? From: "Kevin O'Gorman" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016363b8684b0dff6048d6e0a4d X-Archives-Salt: 61a21f4c-9153-4983-b907-4f001ebe879b X-Archives-Hash: d6a3e5384ee0c6b127a8fe1dace86968 --0016363b8684b0dff6048d6e0a4d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 2:49 PM, walt wrote: > On 08/09/2010 12:33 PM, Kevin O'Gorman wrote: > > > ... > > Now I find that not only >> do the gdbm modules of python and perl reject my files, but so does a C >> program that uses the distributed >> libgdbm. >> > > You didn't say how long ago the problem started, but looking at the > files in sys-libs/gdbm I see nothing newer than March 20. Is your > problem newer than March 20? > > Have you tried running your test program with strace? > > I hadn't done anything with that application in over a year, so I did not have any way to narrow it down. As it happens, I had a sudden rush of brains to the head and read the ewarn message that comes out when you compile gdbm, to the effect that 32-bit systems may have to rebuild, etc, etc. As I suspected, it was LFS-related. Write it off as a case of RTFLog. Now all I have to do is discover why an ewarn wasn't emailed to me -- I thought I had that set up. -- Kevin O'Gorman, PhD --0016363b8684b0dff6048d6e0a4d Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 2:49 PM, walt <w41ter@gmail.com> wrote:
On 08/09/2010 12:33 PM, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:

> ...

Now I find that not only
do the gdbm modules of python and perl reject my files, but so does a C pro= gram that uses the distributed
libgdbm.

You didn't say how long ago the problem started, but looking at the
files in sys-libs/gdbm I see nothing newer than March 20. =A0Is your
problem newer than March 20?

Have you tried running your test program with strace?


I hadn't done anything with that application = in over a year, so I did not have any way to narrow it down.
As it happe= ns, I had a sudden rush of brains to the head and read the ewarn message th= at comes out
when you compile gdbm, to the effect that 32-bit systems may have to rebuil= d, etc, etc.

As I suspected, it was LFS-related.

Write it off= as a case of RTFLog.

Now all I have to do is discover = why an ewarn wasn't emailed to me -- I thought I had that set up.

--
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD

--0016363b8684b0dff6048d6e0a4d--