Fix x86-64 SLES9 tools build problem...bugzilla #34
PATCH 1/1 Fix x86-64 SLES9 tools build problem...bugzilla #34
SLES9 has a problem with it's <asm/elf.h> and other headers associated with it. Since we are only using one thing from this (that we really don't need) we can just stop including it. Someone speak up if they do not think this is a suitable fix.
http://bugzilla.xensource.com/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34
xc_ptrace_core.c 2005-05-26 10:19:45.731123976 -0500 renamed from xc_ptrace_core.c.old 2005-05-26 09:46:39.262113168 -0500 +1 -2
@@ -1,7 +1,6 @@ #include <sys/ptrace.h> #include <sys/wait.h> #include "xc_private.h" -#include <asm/elf.h> #include <time.h>
@@ -258,7 +257,7 @@ xc_ptrace_core(enum __ptrace_request req case PTRACE_GETFPXREGS: if (request == PTRACE_GETREGS) { SET_PT_REGS(pt, ctxt[cpu].user_regs); - memcpy(data, &pt, sizeof(elf_gregset_t)); + memcpy(data, &pt, sizeof(struct gdb_regs)); } else if (request == PTRACE_GETFPREGS) memcpy(data, &ctxt[cpu].fpu_ctxt, sizeof(ctxt[cpu].fpu_ctxt)); else /*if (request == PTRACE_GETFPXREGS)*/
xc_ptrace.c 2005-05-26 10:19:27.347918648 -0500 renamed from xc_ptrace.c.old 2005-05-26 10:15:18.597734424 -0500 +1 -2
@@ -1,7 +1,6 @@ #include <sys/ptrace.h> #include <sys/wait.h> #include "xc_private.h" -#include <asm/elf.h> #include <time.h>
@@ -301,7 +300,7 @@ xc_ptrace(enum __ptrace_request request, if (request == PTRACE_GETREGS) { SET_PT_REGS(pt, ctxt[cpu].user_regs); - memcpy(data, &pt, sizeof(elf_gregset_t)); + memcpy(data, &pt, sizeof(struct gdb_regs)); } else if (request == PTRACE_GETFPREGS) memcpy(data, &ctxt[cpu].fpu_ctxt, sizeof(ctxt[cpu].fpu_ctxt)); else /*if (request == PTRACE_GETFPXREGS)*/
Signature · 4 lines
Jerone Young IBM Linux Technology Center [email protected] 512-838-1157 (T/L: 678-1157)
Why is this patch not in the tree yet? No one seems to have any comments on it. Folks using SLES9 want it.
Quoted 48 lines · Jerone Young
SLES9 has a problem with it's <
asm/elf.h> and other headers associated with it. Since we are only using one thing from this (that we really don't need) we can just stop including it. Someone speak up if they do not think this is a suitable fix.
http://bugzilla.xensource.com/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34Signed-off-by Jerone Young <[email protected]>xc_ptrace_core.c 2005-05-26 10:19:45.731123976 -0500 renamed from xc_ptrace_core.c.old 2005-05-26 09:46:39.262113168 -0500 +1
-2@@ -1,7 +1,6 @@ #include <sys/ptrace.h> #include <sys/wait.h> #include "xc_private.h" -#include <asm/elf.h> #include <time.h>@@ -258,7 +257,7 @@ xc_ptrace_core(enum __ptrace_request req case PTRACE_GETFPXREGS: if (request == PTRACE_GETREGS) { SET_PT_REGS(pt, ctxt[cpu].user_regs); - memcpy(data, &pt, sizeof(elf_gregset_t)); + memcpy(data, &pt, sizeof(struct gdb_regs)); } else if (request == PTRACE_GETFPREGS) memcpy(data, &ctxt[cpu].fpu_ctxt, sizeof(ctxt[cpu].fpu_ctxt)); else /*if (request == PTRACE_GETFPXREGS)*/xc_ptrace.c 2005-05-26 10:19:27.347918648 -0500 renamed from xc_ptrace.c.old 2005-05-26 10:15:18.597734424 -0500 +1
-2@@ -1,7 +1,6 @@ #include <sys/ptrace.h> #include <sys/wait.h> #include "xc_private.h" -#include <asm/elf.h> #include <time.h>@@ -301,7 +300,7 @@ xc_ptrace(enum __ptrace_request request, if (request == PTRACE_GETREGS) { SET_PT_REGS(pt, ctxt[cpu].user_regs); - memcpy(data, &pt, sizeof(elf_gregset_t)); + memcpy(data, &pt, sizeof(struct gdb_regs)); } else if (request == PTRACE_GETFPREGS) memcpy(data, &ctxt[cpu].fpu_ctxt, sizeof(ctxt[cpu].fpu_ctxt)); else /*if (request == PTRACE_GETFPXREGS)*/
Signature · 4 lines
Jerone Young IBM Linux Technology Center [email protected] 512-838-1157 (T/L: 678-1157)
Quoted 2 lines · Jerone Young
Why is this patch not in the tree yet? No one seems to have any comments on it. Folks using SLES9 want it.
It was just committed:
http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-changelog/2005-05/msg00580.html
Signature · 5 lines
Ryan Harper Software Engineer; Linux Technology Center IBM Corp., Austin, Tx (512) 838-9253 T/L: 678-9253 [email protected]