Re: [uml-devel] ARCH=um SUBARCH=i386 breakage?

[Antoine M. <an...@na...>]

Daniel Gryniewicz wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-07-15 at 18:08 +0100, Antoine Martin wrote:
>   
>> Jeff Dike wrote:
>>     
>>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2007 at 10:23:25AM +0100, Antoine Martin wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> I don't mind bugging people to get to the bottom of this, do you know 
>>>> where to knock?
>>>> I can't find anything in MAINTAINERS.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Did you install the headers directly from a kernel tree, or is this
>>> the result of a distro upgrade?
>>>   
>>>       
>> These are the Gentoo packages which are very close to mainline and I 
>> can't find the upstream location for the headers so I guess I will be 
>> filing a bug with Gentoo... We'll see where that leads.
>>
>>     
>
> Actually, the Gentoo headers are not particularly close to the kernel
> headers. 
My mistake.
>  They are heavily "sanitized", meaning that all kinds of things
> that userspace is "not supposed to use" are removed. 
So in a sense, Gentoo kernel headers are ahead of the game. Which means 
that these changes are likely to become an issue not just for Gentoo 
users in the future.

>  This makes it very
> hard for things like UML, that are heavily tied to the kernel, to build.
>   
As Jeff pointed out, this is part of the userspace api:
"the elimination of user.h makes it impossible to use 
PTRACE_SETFP[X]REGS, as there is no way to tell what size buffer should 
be passed in."

Can you suggest a way to code around this issue or is this going to require an update to the Gentoo kernel headers?
Let me know if I can help.

Thanks
Antoine