From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail02.haj.ipfire.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail02.haj.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4j9yVW0R6Xz30JV for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2026 09:32:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail01.ipfire.org (mail01.haj.ipfire.org [172.28.1.202]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1 raw public key) server-digest SHA384 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mail01.haj.ipfire.org", Issuer "YR1" (not verified)) by mail02.haj.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4j9yVR2wh8z2xWP for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2026 09:32:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail01.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4j9yVQ4CrSz6ZN; Fri, 23 Oct 2026 09:32:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipfire.org; s=202003ed25519; t=1792747966; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=PyXvfQ6kyG8U4i+MPRESSCjXOkMlb8A6tKYzVMxau2Q=; b=PFdoa3q1VDBW/7bmcKEwumah5amQbnYVZPBGSjBgdlOYui0Xsid32I853/wFNkVN36E5c2 FHfFtipmz0iL3nBA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipfire.org; s=202003rsa; t=1792747966; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=PyXvfQ6kyG8U4i+MPRESSCjXOkMlb8A6tKYzVMxau2Q=; b=vb+9Zu1ZsAyR6wavdJnM923/I9wOCno2zY5wyilU//iPoA6eI4XhBFMLrK7B/pgx0JA5kn V9Zt2e/93QIc1TZhIghsn6Jgq0HnbJOfOQ4uD+kvXKBqUr2ll8bRAH0VrIT5frDDagEc16 EquVdmKoPD1u+ErrWqJODOhGPnTTGDzPwtRwwHOHZw4+Ug2C1nmY6rmMi4EPzcfpaf7Nw3 B3etCcODI6qVmOegD/cOA4kw3T9lmK9aAjvoZoS/NjciXcZfgTSkHbJ3cTNEJ45QlE/3Lr 24keZBZZ7ThJeoii2st8bD9N6botEDI1L79Htf8NpO2ZfkGi8pSiYDRrjGG32A== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Precedence: list List-Id: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: Sender: Mail-Followup-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Potential glibc 2.44 bug for loongarch64 From: Michael Tremer In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2026 10:32:45 +0100 Cc: development@lists.ipfire.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: Vincent Li Hello Vincent, I am not sure we are looking at a glibc issue here - not in the sense of = something being miscompiled. I have successfully installed the ISO from here in a virtual machine = using UTM: https://nightly.ipfire.org/next/latest/loongarch64/ It was definitely able to detect the disk and complete the installation. = What branch are you building against? Can you confirm that the system = has successfully detected all disks? -Michael > On 23 Oct 2026, at 03:23, Vincent Li wrote: >=20 > Hi Michael, >=20 > I mirrored your core205 toochain upgrade including glibc 2.43 to 2.44 = update to the loongfire repo which is fork of ipfire on loongarch64. I = noticed I could not install the ISO on loongarch machine after glibc = update, if I only revert glibc 2.44 back to 2.43 in the toolchain, no = installation issue. I assume IPFire loongarch port would have same issue = since the loongfire fork has exact same installer code as IPFire. I = filed a bugzilla report to sourceware for glibc. > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D34861 >=20 > Best, >=20 > Vincent