Your message dated Fri, 18 Nov 2005 11:17:31 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#339715: openafs-modules-source: build fails in 
sysincludes.h (redefinition)
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 18 Nov 2005 08:37:51 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 18 00:37:51 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from ip-65-75-40-5.ct.gemini.ntplx.com ([65.75.40.5] helo=bucky)
        by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
        id 1Ed1kk-0002bW-SE
        for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 00:37:50 -0800
Received: by bucky (Postfix, from userid 1000)
        id C7EDE140033; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 03:37:48 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Andrew Cady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: openafs-modules-source: build fails in sysincludes.h (redefinition)
X-Mailer: reportbug 3.8
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 03:37:48 -0500
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
        (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
        autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: openafs-modules-source
Version: 1.3.81-3sarge1
Severity: serious
Tags: patch
Justification: no longer builds from source

Here's the compile error:

    /usr/src/modules/openafs/src/afs/sysincludes.h:79: error: redefinition of 
'struct coda_inode_info'
    /usr/src/modules/openafs/src/afs/sysincludes.h:82: error: redefinition of 
'struct xfs_inode_info'

Here's the fix from the upstream package:

http://openafs.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/openafs/src/afs/sysincludes.h.diff?r1=1.28.2.6%3Aopenafs-devel-1_3_81&tr1=1.28.2.6&r2=text&tr2=1.28.2.7&f=h

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (50, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.11-1-686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)

Versions of packages openafs-modules-source depends on:
ii  bison                       1:1.875d-1   A parser generator that is compati
ii  debhelper                   4.2.32       helper programs for debian/rules
ii  e2fslibs-dev                1.37-2sarge1 ext2 filesystem libraries - header
ii  flex                        2.5.31-31    A fast lexical analyzer generator.
ii  kernel-package              8.135        A utility for building Linux kerne
ii  libncurses5-dev             5.4-4        Developer's libraries and docs for
ii  libpam0g-dev                0.76-22      Development files for PAM

-- no debconf information

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 339715-done) by bugs.debian.org; 18 Nov 2005 19:17:35 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 18 11:17:35 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from smtp3.stanford.edu ([171.67.16.138])
        by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
        id 1EdBjr-00072j-JJ
        for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 11:17:35 -0800
Received: from windlord.stanford.edu (windlord.Stanford.EDU [171.64.19.147])
        by smtp3.Stanford.EDU (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id jAIJHVrH014933;
        Fri, 18 Nov 2005 11:17:31 -0800
Received: by windlord.stanford.edu (Postfix, from userid 1000)
        id 8A590E7937; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 11:17:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Andrew Cady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug#339715: openafs-modules-source: build fails in sysincludes.h 
(redefinition)
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Andrew Cady's message of
        "Fri, 18 Nov 2005 03:37:48 -0500")
Organization: The Eyrie
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 11:17:31 -0800
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) XEmacs/21.4.17 (linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
        (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
        autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Version: 1.3.87-1

Andrew Cady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Version: 1.3.81-3sarge1

> Here's the compile error:

>     /usr/src/modules/openafs/src/afs/sysincludes.h:79: error: redefinition of 
> 'struct coda_inode_info'
>     /usr/src/modules/openafs/src/afs/sysincludes.h:82: error: redefinition of 
> 'struct xfs_inode_info'

> Here's the fix from the upstream package:

> http://openafs.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/openafs/src/afs/sysincludes.h.diff?r1=1.28.2.6%3Aopenafs-devel-1_3_81&tr1=1.28.2.6&r2=text&tr2=1.28.2.7&f=h

[...]

> Kernel: Linux 2.6.11-1-686

Yeah, the openafs-modules-source that shipped with sarge will only work
with the kernels in sarge.  Anything later will have compilation problems.
The openafs-modules-source package in unstable (or testing, for that
matter) should build fine.

This is, unfortunately, not the only problem, or I'd prepare an update for
sarge that fixes only this.  It may be all that's required for 2.6.11
(although I'm not sure about that), but other fixes are required for
2.6.12, 2.6.13, and various kernel options like software suspend.  Getting
an OpenAFS package that builds against any 2.6 kernel for sarge
essentially requires backporting the 1.4.0 release.

-- 
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED])               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to