Aurelien Jarno wrote: > On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 05:51:41PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote: >> Hi >> >> Apparently on a current mipsel (using sid), there are these errors >> regarding enidanness during building of some packages. Probably >> something changed in linux-libc-dev, though userspace should avoid using >> kernelspace headers when possible AFAICS and should probably use >> <endian.h> instead of <asm/byteorder.h>. >> >> Should I file bugs for the packages that FTBFS because of this? >> > > I think there are actually two problems: > - Programs that include <linux/*.h> which in fine includes > <asm/byteorder.h>. This is definitely a problem of the kernel headers.
Is this bug filed? If not, could you take care of that, TIA? > - Programs that FTBFS because they include <asm/byteorder.h>. They could > be fixed by switching to <endian.h>, but I don't think it could be > considered as an RC bug, as the kernel headers have to be fixed > anyway. Ok, these seem to include hdparm, libphysfs, aircrack-ng. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org