From: Garrett C. <yan...@gm...> - 2009-12-15 19:39:34
|
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Mitani <mi...@ry...> wrote: > Hi, > > I applied following Casper's patch to "ltp-2009-12-10" cvs, > then "make" succeeded in RHEL5.4 ia64 system: > http://www.mail-archive.com/ltp...@li.../msg08991.html > > On the other hand, I used Repository's following sources, > but "make" failed. > - "ptrace.h" (Revision 1.9) > - "ptrace04.c" (Revision 1.13) > > But, at least, I think that the Repository's revision about "ptrace04.c" > is right. And "ptrace04.c" of "ltp-2009-12-15" cvs is same one. > > > Today, I arranged Casper's "ptrace.h" patch for "ltp-2009-12-15" cvs > and applied it to this cvs, and "make" succeeded. > > > I tried following other systems as using this patch, and succeeded: > - RHEL5.4(kernel : 2.6.18-164.el5) and x86 architecture > - RHEL5.4(kernel : 2.6.18-164.el5) and x86_64 architecture > - RHEL4.8(kernel : 2.6.9-89.ELsmp) and x86 architecture Until this issue is resolved (I ran into problems trying to use crossdev, so I'll have to manually inspect headers after I track down which versions are used in the Redhat distros specified), please remember that you _can_ always comment out the line which says: /* Define to 1 if you have the <asm/ptrace.h> header file. */ #define HAVE_ASM_PTRACE_H 1 Actually, I think I'll just remove that header check if the build passes unless Mike objects, because we really shouldn't be #include'ing asm/* headers without having a good reason to do so because it results in pain of this magnitude... Thanks, -Garrett |