well, as I recall things could get weird when you start mixing up a libgcc_s with a glibc and libgcc setup that originally had it static. So the compiler may not be set up to deal with that very well if at all...
"Maybe rebooting will work."
The actual Linux developer here. He reboots Linux machines almost as if he were a Windows developer.
rebooting / turning off & on again helps if you have bugs with uninitilized values in your software - the memory is flushed and you therefore have a bigger probability they're initialized to 0...
Elseways sometimes if you've got trouble with drivers of i.e. wlan hardware this may help also.
but usually you only masquerade your error further by doing so.
Re-boots are for testing whether upgrades were power-failure and thus reboot safe.
Normally, stopping and starting a service/daemon can accomplish what one seeks to do with a reboot, in my experience, regardless of whether you're working in Windows or Linux.
If we did more work within the kernel, I might understand the rebooting a bit more. And, perhaps, that's why I find his behavior a tad odd... he was a kernel developer, now finding himself in the application space, and accustomed to reboots as a way to clean everything up.
I may find myself trying to resolve this sooner than expected.
The code mostly works, but occasionally has a weird permissions problem when attempting to get a shared memory object for which the permissions were set appropriately for all to read and write.
I suspect a conflict between the libc required for our shared object, and the libc required for whatever executable that runs in our instrumented shell.
The only way to resolve that will be to ensure our shared object is statically linked.
The code mostly works, but occasionally has a weird permissions
problem when attempting to get a shared memory object for which the
permissions were set appropriately for all to read and write.
Hmmmm... is it possible that instead of 'rw-' you may need 'rwx' ??
Just a thought...
Then there's always
File Permissions of the Beast!
Heh... it's already the permissions of the beast. It's permissions on shared memory, though, from which nothing will be executed, so it shouldn't need 'x' permissions. And, normally, it works... just not in this environment with my perhaps funky compiler thing.
Windows. Does anyone know for sure?
We kicked Germany's ass once. Perhaps we need to do it again.
The Major of munich was annoyed that the admins took some time in hooking his crapphone up to the city's mailing system. Also, "all departments are constantly annoyed with limux".
In other news, the major seems to be an ms fanboy and they have the new german headquarter of ms build in the middle of munich or something unfishy like that.
Some of the employes seem to enjoy the limux, some don't. Others argue "show us the place were a pure windows environment works flawless". Etc., etc., etc.
Most recent article: http://www.heise.de/open/meldung/LiMux-Muenchen-prueft-offenbar-die-Rueckkehr-von-Linux-zu-Windows-2293881.html
Hm, Heise has an english version, "The H", oddly enough they do not seem to have an english article.
the english version - h-online shut down a while back.
it seems as if the munich council has ordered a study whether switching back will improve things.
The desktop PC is obsolete, even if it's running Linux. It's *more* obsolete if it's running Windows.
yes - for shure. and if not, there is terminal server to run windows apps in the closet.
but, its probably hard to tell the worker drones, who have been used to whatever else - and everyone they're talking to outside of the city has that.
You know what I think is cool?
The name of the web site where you can download the utility "rescan-scsi-bus.sh" is ...
Does anyone actually use Oracle Linux? "It's built from the same sources as Red Hat, just like CentOS, except you get to pay us for it!"
Sure, that will work great.
It's especially odd considering they have their own Unix in Solaris. You'd think they'd make an effort to make that a tad more... presentable?
well, if you want to run teh oracle on it, then it could be a thing to do - from the perspective you have one person to blame for your problems, and no fingerpointing possible.
I don't think anybody else would opt in for unbreakable linux.