On Sun, Oct 15 2006, Georg Wittenburg wrote: > On Tuesday 10 October 2006 09:31, Jens Axboe wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 10 2006, Oleg Verych wrote: > > > Jens, please, help to sort out this one. 2.6.19-rc1 was tested with no > > > luck. > > > > > > Bug's thread with more logs is here: > > > <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.kernel/22903> > > > > As nobody seems to have a clue about this so far, I'd suggest you start > > git bisecting with 2.6.16 as the good kernel and 2.6.17 as the bad > > kernel to try and narrow the breakage point down a bit. > > I was about to give this a try, starting with 2.6.17-rc1. Unfortunately, I'm > already running into trouble because 2.6.17-rc1 doesn't compile cleanly with > Debian's .config neither from 2.6.16 nor 2.6.17. The error I'm getting is: > > [...] > CC security/selinux/xfrm.o > security/selinux/xfrm.c: In function 'selinux_socket_getpeer_dgram': > security/selinux/xfrm.c:284: error: 'struct sec_path' has no member named 'x' > security/selinux/xfrm.c: In function 'selinux_xfrm_sock_rcv_skb': > security/selinux/xfrm.c:317: error: 'struct sec_path' has no member named 'x' > make[2]: *** [security/selinux/xfrm.o] Error 1 > make[1]: *** [security/selinux] Error 2 > make: *** [security] Error 2 > > Am I right in assuming that the correct way to work around this is to disable > the related config options? Is this part of the normal git bisecting > procedure or should I be using different .config files alltogether? > > If you could point me to the correct source files of the driver (maybe in > drivers/ide/), I wouldn't mind trying a less brute-force approach.
You probably just want to disable selinux and continue... -- Jens Axboe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
