At Wed, 14 Jan 2004 23:59:58 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 09:40:53AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > At Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:44:00 -0500, > > Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 10:07:18AM -0800, Ryan Murray wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 01:39:33AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > > > > However, bits/syscall.h should be provided by glibc - it should be > > > > > generated from arch/mips/unistd.h. In kernel 2.6 mips guys introduces > > > > > > > > Yes, it should. drow has fixed it in his tree, and this fix should be in > > > > the next upload. > > > > > > No, I've fixed it in my (MontaVista) tree and sent the patch to > > > debian-glibc. Someone should figure out if it works on Debian's > > > version of glibc and kernel headers also, which is quite different from > > > the ones we're using at MV. > > > > Where can I find your patch? The current syscall.h is broken, so I > > think you're ok to put such patch into debian-glibc cvs, and we watch > > the result of buildd if no one is trying to look it. > > X-Mailing-List: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> archive/latest/10962 > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-glibc/2004/debian-glibc-200401/msg00115.html
Thanks, this can be applied cleanly into the debian-glibc tree. Unfortunatelly this patch touches configures; it should be built, tested and confirmed. Guido, could you build with this patch? I'm OK to prepare and put dpatch to debian-glibc cvs for this. > I'd be really grateful if you'd take care of that. The other thing I > know needs to be done is to either add an environment variable to > enable the ld.so warning, or just disable it entirely - Jeff, if you > aren't going to have time for the former then let me know so I can do > the latter. Indeed. Jeff? Regards, -- gotom -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
