Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755053AbXIRIxY (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Sep 2007 04:53:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752139AbXIRIxQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Sep 2007 04:53:16 -0400 Received: from pils.linux-kernel.at ([213.129.242.82]:32842 "EHLO mail.linux-kernel.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751264AbXIRIxP (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Sep 2007 04:53:15 -0400 Message-ID: <46EF90A3.2050109@linux-kernel.at> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 10:47:31 +0200 From: Oliver Falk Organization: Linux kernel Austria User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.4) Gecko/20070615 Fedora/2.0.0.4-1.fc7 Thunderbird/2.0.0.4 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adrian Bunk CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, axp-list@redhat.com, Jay Estabrook , ac-admin@lists.anotherbloody.com Subject: Re: 2.6.23 alpha unistd.h changes References: <46EEE483.4020209@linux-kernel.at> <20070917214107.GB27980@stusta.de> In-Reply-To: <20070917214107.GB27980@stusta.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-lkernAT-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-lkernAT-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-lkernAT-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-4.399, required 5, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -1.80, BAYES_00 -2.60) X-MailScanner-From: oliver@linux-kernel.at Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1359 Lines: 36 On 09/17/2007 11:41 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 10:33:07PM +0200, Oliver Falk wrote: >> Hi! > > Hi Oliver! > >> ... >> As these additions are quite new to upstream kernel, but at Alphacore we >> have patched it since a while now (I don't know about other Alpha ports; >> Debian folks may speak up now!), I would suggest to use the same >> 'ordering' of the syscalls upstream and add the new syscalls that we had >> not in place, but are now upstream to the end of our 'old' list. >> ... > > I just checked: > > It seems Debian didn't patch them into the kernel at all, and since two > months Debian unstable ships kernel 2.6.22 with the upstream syscall > numbers. That's possible a problem. Right. Someone with contacts to Debian here? If Debian hasn't rebuilt glibc against the new headers, we could change it without problems. If not, we have a problem on AC... Anyone with a glibc that was compiled against our patched unistd.h (so including the new syscall numbers), will not be able to upgrade the kernel, but also needs to upgrade glibc and then *must* reboot :-( Best, Oliver - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/