On Tuesday 30 July 2002 12:16, Axel Siebenwirth wrote: > Hi, > 1) Oops
Yeah, that looks about the same. > 2) I got jfs module linux25 from cvs and copied it into kernel tree > of 2.5.29. make mrproper, cp ../.config-2.5 .config, make oldconfig > dep bzImage > > gcc -Wp,-MD,./.file.o.d -D__KERNEL__ > -I/usr/src/linux-2.5.29/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes > -Wno-trigraphs -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer > -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -pipe -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 > -march=i686 -nostdinc -iwithprefix > include -D_JFS_4K -DKBUILD_BASENAME=file -c -o file.o file.c > file.c:101: unknown field ^Sendfile' specified in initializer > file.c:101: ^Generic_file_sendfile' undeclared here (not in a > function) file.c:101: initializer element is not constant > file.c:101: (near initialization for > fs_file_operations.open') > make[3]: *** [file.o] Error 1 > make[3]: Leaving directory /usr/src/linux-2.5.29/fs/jfs' > make[2]: *** [jfs] Error 2 > make[2]: Leaving directory /usr/src/linux-2.5.29/fs' > make[1]: *** [fs] Error 2 > make[1]: Leaving directory /usr/src/linux-2.5.29' > make: *** [bzImage] Error 2 I forgot that the latest cvs tree had post-2.5.29 changes in it. These are from Linus' latest bitkeeper tree. The only things in the 2.5 cvs tree that aren't in 2.5.29 are the patch to remove the d_delete calls in namei.c and two changes that are dependent on other post-2.5.29 kernel changes. So there really isn't any need to pull the cvs source into 2.5.29. I'm sorry I didn't catch this before you went to the trouble. > Regards and thanks in advance, > Axel Thanks for the update, Shaggy -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/jfs-discussion
