Re: BUG with proposed fix Re: [uml-devel] Can't compile under vanilla 2.6.11

[Ian M. <im...@gm...>]

The other problem with not linking va_copy has been resolved by
changing to __va_copy in skas/uaccess.c. This seems to be a known
problem with older compilers and there is a patch out there but not in
2.6.11 or by the looks of it 2.6.12 rc1 by my reading of the log (nor
for one for my previous e-mail)


On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:43:54 +1200, Ian McDonald <im...@gm...> wrote:
> OK after much further investigation, redownloading of source
> (2.6.11.4) and looking at what you have said I know why it is
> breaking....
> 
> I had assumed (wrongly of course) that ARCH_SYSCALLS was a one line
> symbol definition but it is much more than this.
> 
> The problem occurs because in both
> arch/um/include/sysdep-i386/syscalls.h and in
> arch/um/kernel/sys_call_table.c a number of the elements are defined
> in BOTH files.
> 
> I presume the reason why this doesn't break others systems is that
> they are not using the same version of gcc as me (2.95.4). I would
> guess that with a later gcc in an enum you can redefine an element and
> it doesn't complain...
> 
> Anyway I believe the proper fix is to delete the lines from
> arch/um/kernel/sys_call_table.c and here is a patch to do that:
> 
> 255d254
> <       [ __NR_statfs64 ] = (syscall_handler_t *) sys_statfs64,
> 258,260d256
> <       [ __NR_utimes ] = (syscall_handler_t *) sys_utimes,
> <       [ __NR_fadvise64_64 ] = (syscall_handler_t *) sys_fadvise64_64,
> <       [ __NR_vserver ] = (syscall_handler_t *) sys_vserver,
> 
> Can somebody verify that and if correct submit to whoever (this is my
> first ever attempt at fixing something in the kernel so not quite sure
> what to do next!!)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ian
> 
> PS still have some linking issues and I will report on them as I work
> out why....
> 
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 18:43:05 -0500, Rob Landley <ro...@la...> wrote:
> > Ah, nevermind.  Check out Anton's message.  You were using a -bk snapshot
> > rather than the officially 2.6.11 release, I take it?
> >
> > Rob
> >
>