Re: post 2.6.7 BK change breaks Java?

[Con Kolivas]

Jesper Juhl wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, Matthias Andree wrote:
>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've pulled from the linux-2.6 BK tree some post-2.6.7 version, compiled
> > and installed it, and it breaks Java, standalone or plugged into
> > firefox, the symptom is that the application catches SIGKILL. This
> > didn't happen with stock 2.6.7 and doesn't happen with 2.6.6 either.
>
> I'm seeing the same thing. I'm using Eclipse a lot which is Java based,
> and I noticed that wen I went from plain 2.6.7 to 2.6.7-mm3 Eclipse
> started dying shortly after launch (it only manages to get the splash
> screen up) with a message about the JVM dying. Since I had also upgraded
> my Sun Java at the same time I initially suspected that and back down to
> my old version, but the problem persisted. Then I tried the latest Java
> release from Sun, with same result. Then I started suspecting the kernel
> and tried 2.6.7-mm6, 2.6.7-bk20 and 2.6.7-mm7 - all with the same result
> that Java breaks. Finally I went back to a plain 2.6.7 and the problem
> went away - so it certainly looks kernel related.
> I was using the same .config with all kernels (copied from my plain 2.6.7
> kernel to the others and then running 'make oldconfig'), so I'm also
> pretty sure it's not due to some new kernel option I've enabled that I
> don't usually use.
>
> My hardware is AMD Athlon (t-bird) 1.4GHz CPU in a ASUS A7M266 mobo with
> 512MB of DDR266 RAM.
>
>
>
> > Is there any particular change I should try backing out?
>
> I'm looking for the same thing, haven't found it yet unfortunately.

Hello

I've just started having a java application bomb out not long into 
running as well where previously it would run for hours without 
problems. However, unlike  yourselves I'm running -ck and the only 
change between the last working -ck and this kernel are the 3 security 
patches. I haven't investigated because I cant take the machine offline, 
but I suspect it's one of those possibly interfering. Looking at the 
patches in question I have no idea how they could do it. I guess if you 
can try backing them out it would be helpful. Here are links to the 
patches in question.

http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/2.6/2.6.7/2.6.7-ck5/split-out/1100_ip_tables.patch
http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/2.6/2.6.7/2.6.7-ck5/split-out/1105_CAN-2004-0497.patch
http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/2.6/2.6.7/2.6.7-ck5/split-out/1110_proc.patch

Con

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature