On Monday 17 September 2007 12:04, Marc Schiffbauer wrote: > * Arno Lehmann schrieb am 17.09.07 um 11:51 Uhr: > > Hi, > > > > 17.09.2007 11:44,, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:: > > ... > > > > > Might it be that this test depends on the libc version or something > > > like that and not really on the kernel? > > > > > > [...] > > > checking for posix_fadvise... yes > > > [...] > > > (and its really set in src/config.h after configure) > > > > > > BTW: > > > Debian sarge ships with 2.6 as well as 2.4 kernel-images: > > > > Looks like another switch to ./configure is necessary, if automatic > > detection of posix_fadvise() is unreliable... > > Maybe the best would be to detect that at runtime, as kernels may > change in a system... is this possible?
Not to my knowledge, but I don't want to be or pretend to be a kernel expert. As I previously wrote, it looks like you have header files that correspond to a 2.6 kernel and not your 2.4 kernel. You need to fix that or you are likely to have an unstable system for both building programs and for running programs. IMO, Bacula's code detecting of the configuration is correct, it is just the environment that is not correct, and even if you kludge around this problem by manually setting the #define, you are likely, IMO, to have other such subtle problems. Regards, Kern ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
