Chuck Ebbert wrote:
Okay, I tested with Fedora on x86_64 and it worked there too. (Not that that proves much.) Did you capture any of the error messages, like the address of the segfault?
FWIW, on x86-64, this should show up in dmesg. -hpa - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is PIE randomization breaking klibc binaries?
- From: Ulrich Kunitz <[email protected]>
- Re: Is PIE randomization breaking klibc binaries?
- From: Ulrich Kunitz <[email protected]>
- Re: Is PIE randomization breaking klibc binaries?
- References:
- Is PIE randomization breaking klibc binaries?
- From: Ulrich Kunitz <[email protected]>
- Re: Is PIE randomization breaking klibc binaries?
- From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
- Re: Is PIE randomization breaking klibc binaries?
- From: Chuck Ebbert <[email protected]>
- Re: Is PIE randomization breaking klibc binaries?
- From: Chuck Ebbert <[email protected]>
- Re: Is PIE randomization breaking klibc binaries?
- From: Ulrich Kunitz <[email protected]>
- Re: Is PIE randomization breaking klibc binaries?
- From: Chuck Ebbert <[email protected]>
- Is PIE randomization breaking klibc binaries?
- Prev by Date: Re: Patches for REALLY TINY 386 kernels
- Next by Date: Re: Patches for REALLY TINY 386 kernels
- Previous by thread: Re: Is PIE randomization breaking klibc binaries?
- Next by thread: Re: Is PIE randomization breaking klibc binaries?
- Index(es):
 |