Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | Re: linux/a.out.h is not exported to userspace | From | David Woodhouse <> | Date | Sun, 18 May 2008 12:16:32 +0100 |
| |
On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 17:13 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > Hi, > > Looking for a compile failure for a package on uclibc system using > kernel-headers from 2.6.25 I found that linux/a.out.h is no more > exported to userland anymore. > > This commit below has disabled it from being exported. The commit Do not > export asm/page.h during make headers_install so I was wondering if it > was intended to unexport linux/a.out.h or not. > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=ed7b1889da256977574663689b598d88950bbd23 > > > Looking at the patch from lkml post > > http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Kernel/2007-10/msg08913.html > > second hunk to include/linux/Kbuild was not applied which caused this > problem. > > I think I do not fall into Signed-off-by definition. I tested the > following patch on 2.6.25. > > Thanks > > -Khem > > Tested-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> > > diff --git a/include/linux/Kbuild b/include/linux/Kbuild > index b7d81b2..8a3d93e 100644 > --- a/include/linux/Kbuild > +++ b/include/linux/Kbuild > @@ -168,6 +168,7 @@ unifdef-y += acct.h > unifdef-y += adb.h > unifdef-y += adfs_fs.h > unifdef-y += agpgart.h > +unifdef-y += a.out.h > unifdef-y += apm_bios.h > unifdef-y += atalk.h > unifdef-y += atmdev.h
That'll export <linux/a.out.h> even on architectures where <asm/a.out.h> doesn't exist -- which will cause headers_check to fail.
Perhaps we could do it something like this: --- a/include/linux/Kbuild +++ b/include/linux/Kbuild @@ -168,6 +168,9 @@ unifdef-y += acct.h unifdef-y += adb.h unifdef-y += adfs_fs.h unifdef-y += agpgart.h +ifeq ($(wildcard include/asm-$(SRCARCH)/a.out.h),include/asm-$(SRCARCH)/a.out.h) +unifdef-y += a.out.h +endif unifdef-y += apm_bios.h unifdef-y += atalk.h unifdef-y += atmdev.h In fact, perhaps we could do <linux/kvm.h> that way too -- I believe I objected to using a CONFIG symbol, but the mere existence of the file would be fine. I don't think we thought of that at the time.
-- dwmw2
| |