[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> I've the doubt that the addition would better go under sys-i386 or
> some other subarch-dependent directories (in a file compiled against
> kernelspace headers, i.e. not listed in USER_OBJS in the directory
> it's contained inside), and it'd be nice to add also the
On Friday 04 February 2005 20:38, Frank Sorenson wrote:
> The stack randomization patches that went into 2.6.11-rc3-mm1 broke
> compilation of ARCH=um. This patch fixes compiling by adding
> arch_align_stack back in.
>
> Signed-off-by: Frank Sorenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Acked-By: Jeff Dike
On Friday 04 February 2005 20:38, Frank Sorenson wrote:
The stack randomization patches that went into 2.6.11-rc3-mm1 broke
compilation of ARCH=um. This patch fixes compiling by adding
arch_align_stack back in.
Signed-off-by: Frank Sorenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Acked-By: Jeff Dike [EMAIL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I've the doubt that the addition would better go under sys-i386 or
some other subarch-dependent directories (in a file compiled against
kernelspace headers, i.e. not listed in USER_OBJS in the directory
it's contained inside), and it'd be nice to add also the x86_64
The stack randomization patches that went into 2.6.11-rc3-mm1 broke
compilation of ARCH=um. This patch fixes compiling by adding
arch_align_stack back in.
Signed-off-by: Frank Sorenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-By: Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Frank
--
Frank Sorenson - KD7TZK
Systems Manager,
The stack randomization patches that went into 2.6.11-rc3-mm1 broke
compilation of ARCH=um. This patch fixes compiling by adding
arch_align_stack back in.
Signed-off-by: Frank Sorenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Acked-By: Jeff Dike [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Frank
--
Frank Sorenson - KD7TZK
Systems Manager,
6 matches
Mail list logo
