On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 16:56:16 +0000 "Burton, Ross" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 23 March 2018 at 16:49, Seebs <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 16:30:55 +0000 > > "Burton, Ross" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Because in GNU's infinite wisdom they're using renameat2() to do > >> atomic renames in the mv command, and as renameat2 isn't in the > >> headers for F27 it just does a syscall directly. This is in > >> upstream coreutils so once they make a release, everyone gets it. > > > > UGH. > > > > I... am really unsure whether it's possible to catch that, because > > I really, really, don't want to try to intercept raw syscall() > > calls. I don't think that ends well. > > > > I wonder if they can be persuaded to, you know, NOT use a syscall > > directly when it's not in the system headers, on the grounds that > > the system headers define the exported interface, and bypassing > > them is almost certainly a very bad idea. > > Just chatting to the fakeroot maintainer now, as this is presumably > going to break the entire Debian build infrastructure when they get > the coreutils upgrade. He isn't massively thrilled either. They have > the option of just reverting these changes to coreutils though. It's *possible* that there's a workaround, but I think realistically the right answer is probably "yell at coreutils not to do that". -s -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
