Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1997-49,: Re: old_sigset_t vs sigset_t

# Re: old_sigset_t vs sigset_t

Myles Uyema (myles@puck.nether.net)
Tue, 9 Dec 1997 18:21:40 -0500 (EST)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Royans K Tharakan: "Definition of Kernel BUG"
- Previous message: Richard B. Johnson: "Re: pppd 2.3.1-6 doesn't work with 2.1.71 - did work with 2.1.64 - F00F"

On Tue, 9 Dec 1997, Myrdraal wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 09, 1997 at 01:43:03PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> Hi,
> > flynnjs@mobility.bt.co.uk said:
> > > I've just gone from libc-5.4.33 -> 5.4.38 as this is what linuxhq
> > > suggests is needed for 2.1 - I'm (trying) to go 2.1 from today.
> > > Kerneld 2.1.55 and mount 2.7g fail to compile due to sigset_t
> > So does kerneld 2.1.71, more surprisingly.
> Strangely enough, modutils 2.1.71 compiled without a hitch for me. Perhaps
> it's because I use glibc?

Correct. The 'problem' with libc5 is that it's headers rely too much on
the linux kernel includes. glibc tries as little as possible to use
kernel headers, as the Linux kernel source tree changes quite frequently.
Many people have experienced this.

    --
    Myles Uyema
    myles@puck.nether.net

    YES freenet.nether.net is back online!

- Next message: Royans K Tharakan: "Definition of Kernel BUG"
- Previous message: Richard B. Johnson: "Re: pppd 2.3.1-6 doesn't work with 2.1.71 - did work with 2.1.64 - F00F"