On 08/29/2012 08:05 PM, Saul Wold wrote:
On 08/29/2012 06:48 AM, Radu Moisan wrote:
On 08/15/2012 10:32 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
On 15 August 2012 20:27, McClintock Matthew-B29882
wrote:
I've been doing something similar and it's been working OK. - I think
we should apply Ross's patch.
Rad
On 08/29/2012 06:48 AM, Radu Moisan wrote:
On 08/15/2012 10:32 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
On 15 August 2012 20:27, McClintock Matthew-B29882
wrote:
I've been doing something similar and it's been working OK. - I think
we should apply Ross's patch.
Radu's, not mine.
Ross
What's happening with
On 08/15/2012 10:32 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
On 15 August 2012 20:27, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
I've been doing something similar and it's been working OK. - I think
we should apply Ross's patch.
Radu's, not mine.
Ross
What's happening with this one? Is it going to me merged or someth
On 15 August 2012 20:27, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
> I've been doing something similar and it's been working OK. - I think
> we should apply Ross's patch.
Radu's, not mine.
Ross
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openem
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Chris Larson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:37 AM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>>> On 24 July 2012 14:27, Chris Larson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Radu Moisan
wrote:
>>>
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:37 AM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>> On 24 July 2012 14:27, Chris Larson wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Radu Moisan wrote:
I have not tested on CentOS 5.8 if the applications are not broke
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> On 24 July 2012 14:27, Chris Larson wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Radu Moisan wrote:
>>> I have not tested on CentOS 5.8 if the applications are not broken in some
>>> way, but that's not in the scope of this patch. If somethin
On 24 July 2012 14:27, Chris Larson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Radu Moisan wrote:
>> I have not tested on CentOS 5.8 if the applications are not broken in some
>> way, but that's not in the scope of this patch. If something does indeed
>> break, then a totally different patch is r
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Radu Moisan wrote:
> I have not tested on CentOS 5.8 if the applications are not broken in some
> way, but that's not in the scope of this patch. If something does indeed
> break, then a totally different patch is required, targeting a backport of
> kmod for kerne
As far as kmod package is concerned O_CLOEXEC is used in constructs like
"O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC". O_CLOEXEC can be used (is defined) starting with
Linux kernel ≥2.6.23 and glibc ≥2.7 case in which the patch does not
logically changing anything. However, prior Linux kernel ≥2.6.23
O_CLOEXEC is not
Radu Moisan
writes:
> Close-on-exec seems to be unsuported on some architectures like CentOS 5.8
> and thus causing some packages to fail to build successfully.
Have you verified that making O_CLOEXEC a noop does not break the
applications?
Enrico
Close-on-exec seems to be unsuported on some architectures like CentOS 5.8
and thus causing some packages to fail to build successfully. Future kernel
version will probably fix this, but for now this patch works around this
problem.
Signed-off-by: Radu Moisan
---
meta/recipes-kernel/kmod/kmod.in
12 matches
Mail list logo
