On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 10:33:07PM +0200, Oliver Falk wrote: > Hi! Hi Oliver!
> At Alphacore we used to patch the kernel headers for a while now; We > added syscalls __NR_openat (447) until __NR_tee (466). Why did your numbers differ from the numbers that were used in the upstream kernel? The Alpha maintainers (Cc's added) might now better what happened here. > However, since 2.6.23 these syscall where added upstream, but with > different syscall numbers; What happens is the following: >... These syscalls were added in 2.6.22, not 2.6.23, and are therefore in the officially released kernel since more than two months. Changing a userspace ABI that has already been part of an officially released kernel because someone patched other syscall numbers into his private kernel doesn't sound like a good solution. > Best, > Oliver cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/