Robert Yang wrote on 2012-03-06: > Hi Tom, > Thanks for the update, the root cause is that iptables offers a kernel > header file include/linux/types.h, but it mis-matches the kernel in > the sysroot, we can add this: > #define __aligned_u64 __u64 __attribute__((aligned(8))) > to: > iptables-1.4.12.2/include/linux/types.h > to fix this problem. > > Another solution is that as Dexuan suggested we change the order of > the include header files, but I'm afraid that may cause other > problems, since I think that the pkg's own header file should have a > higher priority than the system's, so I think that the current order is > correct. My understanding is: Recently the preferred linux-libc-headers was upgraded to linux-libc-headers-yocto-3.2, that introduced a new struct tpacket_hdr_v1 in linux/if_packet.h and the new struct uses __aligned_u64 but __aligned_u64 is not defined in iptables's own linux/types.h Currently in iptables's makefile, its own linux/types.h comes first than that one in our sysroot in the header file search order, and I noticed iptables doesn't have a file linux/if_packet.h. So, with our sysroot's linux/if_package.h and iptables's own linux/types, we get the failure.
If we define __aligned_u64 _ in iptables's own linux/types.h, we're still using our sysroot's linux/if_packet.h with iptables's linux/types.h -- I think this is not correct even if the build can pass? I think we should use header files consistently. Thanks, -- Dexuan _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
