[uml-devel] problems compiling 2.6.17 against glibc 2.4
The problem is that arch/um/os-Linux/sys-i386/registers.c
messes around inside a jmp_buf, and in glibc 2.4 the glibc
maintainers have helpfully removed the definitions that
let you poke around in there (they were only there for the
sake of one macro, _JMPBUF_UNWINDS, which is no longer
user-visible.)
This vile patch lets me compile but is almost certainly not good enough:
however, I don't know what *is* good enough: now that glibc is blocking
us from the layout of the jmp_buf, what's to stop them from changing it?
(Well, other than that it would break the ABI ;) )
A temporary hack to make it compile is
--- linux-orig/arch/um/os-Linux/sys-i386/registers.c2006-06-20
08:17:47.0 +0100
+++ linux/arch/um/os-Linux/sys-i386/registers.c 2006-06-21 07:54:52.0
+0100
@@ -130,6 +130,14 @@
HOST_FP_SIZE * sizeof(unsigned long));
}
+# define JB_BX 0
+# define JB_SI 1
+# define JB_DI 2
+# define JB_BP 3
+# define JB_SP 4
+# define JB_PC 5
+# define JB_SIZE 24
+
void get_thread_regs(union uml_pt_regs *uml_regs, void *buffer)
{
struct __jmp_buf_tag *jmpbuf = buffer;
but that's hardly acceptable in the long run.
--
`NB: Anyone suggesting that we should say "Tibibytes" instead of
Terabytes there will be hunted down and brutally slain.
That is all.' --- Matthew Wilcox
All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and Risk!
Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat certifications in
the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=107521&bid=248729&dat=121642
___
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
Re: [uml-devel] Another cause for UML
"Carl Radford (DC0854-IT)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto: > Any chance I can interest the UML developers I've included some more address (including Jeff, UML 1st author and maintainer). > in fixing UML to > support openMosix (for the purposes of debugging) ? > I applied the openMosix patch to a stock kernel (2.6.16) and then > tried to build a um kernel (yes I should know better :>), > but there are (obviously) inconsistencies between the would-be-used > include/arch-i386 header files and the actually-used > include/um header files (seem to be mostly ptrace/regs stuff). > For > someone who knows their way around UML, it should > be quite trivial to sort the compilation issues (yes I'm > simplifying, but I'm trying to get you on my side). > I am not trying to recruit you, from there on it would be up to the > openMosix development team not to break it again, unless > you wanted to contribute, of course.. :>). > Being able to debug the kernel this way would be of great benefit > to openMosix development and earn UML yet another gold star. Having helped NTFS (and probably FUSE) to get going is one of the UML merits, but we likely should advertise this (we know this indirectly, by having seen those projects' authors using UML for debug). Start posting some of these errors and we'll look at how trivial it is (unless the compiler is flooding you). If they look trivial to us we may try it... But my 1st question is: does OpenMosix currently support anything else than x86? If not a little compatibility layer may be needed and this may hinder significantly the porting - however they'll have to fix this anyway to support x86_64 at the very least. Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and Risk! Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat certifications in the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=107521&bid=248729&dat=121642 ___ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
