I've put in your patch.
If you think investigation of errnoent.h, signalent.h and ioctlent.h
is necessary, please ask back. If you would like a test compile on m68k
before releasing a new patch, I'll be happy to help as well.
I have no idea. You'll have to compare the m68k values to what's
Please send a patch that creates a linux/m68k/syscallent.h with correct
contents, unless m68k really matches i386 exactly. Please also compose
ChangeLog entries in the canonical format you see there and send those
ahead of the patch.
A point I'm not clear on: is the inclusion of __NR_exit_group
Please send a patch that creates a linux/m68k/syscallent.h with correct
contents, unless m68k really matches i386 exactly. Please also compose
ChangeLog entries in the canonical format you see there and send those
ahead of the patch.
Thanks for reminding me. m68k does not match i386 exactly,
The differences have grown too big to be incorporated into the i386 table,
so I'll separate out the m68k table entirely as you suggest. This means
I'll also send a patch clearing all m68k bits from the i386 table, OK?
Great.
Do I need to change anything else in order to get a new
This is just a new symptom of the fact that m68k support has been wrong for
a long time. It's using the syscall table that's right for i386, and they
are not the same any more. An m68k hacker needs to supply a current
syscall table for strace.
I've taken a look at it, and prepared a
This is just a new symptom of the fact that m68k support has been wrong for
a long time. It's using the syscall table that's right for i386, and they
are not the same any more. An m68k hacker needs to supply a current
syscall table for strace.
While the syscall table is indeed outdated (the
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Roland McGrath wrote:
This is just a new symptom of the fact that m68k support has been wrong for
a long time. It's using the syscall table that's right for i386, and they
are not the same any more. An m68k hacker needs to supply a current
syscall table for strace.
This is just a new symptom of the fact that m68k support has been wrong for
a long time. It's using the syscall table that's right for i386, and they
are not the same any more. An m68k hacker needs to supply a current
syscall table for strace.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: strace
Version: 4.5.12-1
Severity: normal
strace is failing to build on m68k in an interesting way:
if gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I. -Ilinux/m68k -I../linux/m68k -Ilinux
-I../linux -Wall -g -O2 -MT syscall.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/syscall.Tpo -c -o
syscall.o ../syscall.c; \
then mv -f
9 matches
Mail list logo
