On 09/18/2007 11:11 AM, Sergey Tikhonov wrote: > Oliver Falk wrote: >> On 09/17/2007 11:22 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 10:33:07PM +0200, Oliver Falk wrote: >>> >>>> 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? >>> >> >> Afaik, our patch was done a while ago and nobody every submitted it >> upstream - don't know why... >> > Yes, it was done by me and I had no info how to push the updates to > upstream, sorry. (by that time, > there were no latest "distribution" available with those changes). >> At AC, we follow RH/Fedora packages and there we had glibc-kernheaders - >> where our patch originates. When the glibc/kernel packages changed and >> glibc-kernheaders died, I patched the syscalls into kernel headers; Not >> thinking that I better submit it upstream. :-( >> > Yea, now there is more interest and it is better to do it right. :)
To make it easy for everyone.... There should not be many AC users that run the latest versions of everything. I will keep the sorting of the syscalls as they are - no change required upstream. People who want new kernel or new glibc will then also need to update the other. DOT. POINT. END. :-) Kernel 2.6.23 will also require new aboot.... So many things.... Since online upgrading from AC3 to FC8axp will not be supported anyway (because of various reasons and now 2 more of them), I can live with that decision finally. Thx everyone... Best, Oliver - 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/