Josh Boyer wrote:
> That should be the question, yes. The answer is:
>
> However far back people wish to use older stable kernel-headers to build
> applications against newer glibc.
>
> It isn't a clear answer.
Thanks for explaining.
> Some people stick with older
On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 21:27 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:26:36AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 10:40 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > Recently, glibc made a change to suppress sign-conversion warnings in
> > > FD_SET
> > > (glibc commit ceb9e56b3d1).
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 08:33:22PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> > Indeed. However, I believe Linus pointed out that even before
> > 8b3d1cda4f5f the macros that were removed weren't actually used.
> > It's likely safe to go back further than just 3.4.
> >
> >
Hi,
Josh Boyer wrote:
> Indeed. However, I believe Linus pointed out that even before
> 8b3d1cda4f5f the macros that were removed weren't actually used.
> It's likely safe to go back further than just 3.4.
>
> I'll verify again in the morning and include the furthest back we could
> remove
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:26:36AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 10:40 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > Recently, glibc made a change to suppress sign-conversion warnings in FD_SET
> > (glibc commit ceb9e56b3d1). This uncovered an issue with the kernel's
> > definition of
On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 10:40 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Recently, glibc made a change to suppress sign-conversion warnings in FD_SET
> (glibc commit ceb9e56b3d1). This uncovered an issue with the kernel's
> definition of __NFDBITS if applications #include after
> including . A build failure
Recently, glibc made a change to suppress sign-conversion warnings in FD_SET
(glibc commit ceb9e56b3d1). This uncovered an issue with the kernel's
definition of __NFDBITS if applications #include after
including . A build failure would be seen when passing the
-Werror=sign-compare and
On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 10:40 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Recently, glibc made a change to suppress sign-conversion warnings in FD_SET
(glibc commit ceb9e56b3d1). This uncovered an issue with the kernel's
definition of __NFDBITS if applications #include linux/types.h after
including sys/select.h.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:26:36AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 10:40 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Recently, glibc made a change to suppress sign-conversion warnings in FD_SET
(glibc commit ceb9e56b3d1). This uncovered an issue with the kernel's
definition of __NFDBITS if
Hi,
Josh Boyer wrote:
Indeed. However, I believe Linus pointed out that even before
8b3d1cda4f5f the macros that were removed weren't actually used.
It's likely safe to go back further than just 3.4.
I'll verify again in the morning and include the furthest back we could
remove these.
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 08:33:22PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Hi,
Josh Boyer wrote:
Indeed. However, I believe Linus pointed out that even before
8b3d1cda4f5f the macros that were removed weren't actually used.
It's likely safe to go back further than just 3.4.
I'll verify
On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 21:27 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:26:36AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 10:40 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Recently, glibc made a change to suppress sign-conversion warnings in
FD_SET
(glibc commit ceb9e56b3d1). This
Josh Boyer wrote:
That should be the question, yes. The answer is:
However far back people wish to use older stable kernel-headers to build
applications against newer glibc.
It isn't a clear answer.
Thanks for explaining.
Some people stick with older kernels
Recently, glibc made a change to suppress sign-conversion warnings in FD_SET
(glibc commit ceb9e56b3d1). This uncovered an issue with the kernel's
definition of __NFDBITS if applications #include linux/types.h after
including sys/select.h. A build failure would be seen when passing the
14 matches
Mail list logo
