Bah, so this may be actually problem of compat/freebsd, which has
too loose check and mistakens the Linux binary as FreeBSD
(and runs it under FreeBSD emulation). I recall there was
some change in compat/freebsd regarding the signature recently; 
perhaps that makes the stuff mistakely match certain Linux binaries.

Jaromir

Murray Armfield wrote:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 09:43 pm, you wrote:
> > >   2268 ktrace   NAMI  "/usr/pkg/emul/linux/sbin/ldconfig"
> > >   2268 ldconfig EMUL  "freebsd"
> >
> > I can't help feeling that a binary in emul/linux shouldn't be
> > running under EMUL freebsd...
> 
> Using the same linux emul stuff and kernels and trying ktrace on 
> /usr/pkg/emul/linux/bin/pwd gives...
> 
> 2493 ktrace   EMUL  "netbsd"
>   2493 ktrace   CALL  execve(0xbfbfba26,0xbfbfb930,0xbfbfb938)
>   2493 ktrace   NAMI  "./pwd"
>   2493 ktrace   NAMI  "/emul/linux/lib/ld-linux.so.2"
>   2493 ktrace   NAMI  "/emul/linux"
>   2493 ktrace   NAMI  "/emul/linux/lib/ld-linux.so.2"
>   2493 pwd      EMUL  "linux"
>   2493 pwd      RET   execve -1 errno -2 No such file or directory
>   2493 pwd      CALL  uname(0xbfbfb4fc)
>   2493 pwd      RET   uname 0
> 
> etc. Which has the emulation correctly selected. So, ldconfig binary selects 
> wrong emulation, pwd doesn't. Further testing here may indicate only fresh 
> installs are reporting any lossage; ldconfig may be the only binary affected. 
> On a quick check, these seemed OK...
> 	pwd, false, true, ldd, test, printf
> 
> Not sure how to procede from here. :-(
> 
> Take care,
> 	Murray
> 


-- 
Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org>            http://www.NetBSD.org/
-=- We should be mindful of the potential goal, but as the tantric    -=-
-=- Buddhist masters say, ``You may notice during meditation that you -=-
-=- sometimes levitate or glow.   Do not let this distract you.''     -=-