reassign 269721 uclibc thanks At Sat, 28 May 2005 01:22:24 +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > > > - Also export __kernel_dev_t for util-linux/cryptoloop (Closes: > > > > 220991). > > > > > > This causes problems when building uclibc, since it defines > > > __kernel_dev_t in its own headers. I recently switched uclibc > > > to use linux-kernel-headers instead of straight kernel headers > > > for the same reason that glibc -- it's the Right Way To Do It. > > > > > > This is wishlist, since I currently have a workaround in uclibc. > > > > David, if so, then how to resolve util-linux report #220991? > > I looked at uclibc, and I wondered __kernel_dev_t defines as unsigned > short. In 2.6 linux kernel adopts 32bit kernel dev_t. Plus, it seems > your hack is applied only for arm. Why do we need to hide > __kernel_dev_t from lkh headers? I would like to hear your opinion.
As I explained before, I think it's not lkh bug. I reassigned it to uclibc source package. David, if you think it should be fixed in lkh, please reassign it back with the detailed information. But actually __kernel_dev_t is now 32bit in 2.6 kernel, so it's uclibc issue, IMHO. Regards, -- gotom -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
