error: #error Fix asm/byteorder.h to define one endianness
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? Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: error: #error Fix asm/byteorder.h to define one endianness
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. - 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. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: error: #error Fix asm/byteorder.h to define one endianness
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
Re: error: #error Fix asm/byteorder.h to define one endianness
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 07:49:16PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote: 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? Not yet, I am trying to understand the problem. It seems it only happens if sys/types.h is included before asm/byteorder.h -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: error: #error Fix asm/byteorder.h to define one endianness
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 08:34:12PM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 07:49:16PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote: 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? Not yet, I am trying to understand the problem. It seems it only happens if sys/types.h is included before asm/byteorder.h Filed as bug#519761, with a patch. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
