Re: [uml-devel] linux-next: Tree for July 26 (uml)

2012-08-14 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 08/14/2012 08:17 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 14.08.2012 17:15, schrieb David Howells: >> How about this then? >> >> David >> --- >> diff --git a/arch/x86/um/Kconfig b/arch/x86/um/Kconfig >> index 9926e11..a4b0c10 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/um/Kconfig >> +++ b/arch/x86/um/Kconfig >> @@ -21,

Re: [uml-devel] linux-next: Tree for July 26 (uml)

2012-08-14 Thread Richard Weinberger
Am 14.08.2012 17:15, schrieb David Howells: > How about this then? > > David > --- > diff --git a/arch/x86/um/Kconfig b/arch/x86/um/Kconfig > index 9926e11..a4b0c10 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/um/Kconfig > +++ b/arch/x86/um/Kconfig > @@ -21,9 +21,11 @@ config 64BIT > config X86_32 > def_bool !6

Re: [uml-devel] linux-next: Tree for July 26 (uml)

2012-08-14 Thread David Howells
How about this then? David --- diff --git a/arch/x86/um/Kconfig b/arch/x86/um/Kconfig index 9926e11..a4b0c10 100644 --- a/arch/x86/um/Kconfig +++ b/arch/x86/um/Kconfig @@ -21,9 +21,11 @@ config 64BIT config X86_32 def_bool !64BIT select HAVE_AOUT + select MODULES_USE_ELF_RE

Re: [uml-devel] linux-next: Tree for July 26 (uml)

2012-08-14 Thread David Howells
David Howells wrote: > > I think arch/x86/um/Kconfig makes more sense. > ... > It doesn't exist. Should I create it? Bah. Helps if I read your message more closely. David -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive

Re: [uml-devel] linux-next: Tree for July 26 (uml)

2012-08-14 Thread Richard Weinberger
Am 14.08.2012 17:06, schrieb David Howells: > Richard Weinberger wrote: > >> I think arch/x86/um/Kconfig makes more sense. > > warthog>ls arch/um > defconfig Kconfig.common Kconfig.um Makefile-os-Linux scripts/ > drivers/ Kconfig.debug kernel/Makefile-ppc sys-ia64/

Re: [uml-devel] linux-next: Tree for July 26 (uml)

2012-08-14 Thread David Howells
Richard Weinberger wrote: > I think arch/x86/um/Kconfig makes more sense. warthog>ls arch/um defconfig Kconfig.common Kconfig.um Makefile-os-Linux scripts/ drivers/ Kconfig.debug kernel/Makefile-ppc sys-ia64/ include/ Kconfig.net Makefile Makefile-sk

Re: [uml-devel] linux-next: Tree for July 26 (uml)

2012-08-14 Thread Richard Weinberger
Am 14.08.2012 16:54, schrieb David Howells: > David Howells wrote: > >> I can certainly try pasting the lines from x86/Kconfig to uml/Kconfig.common >> to switch the REL/RELA bits, but it would be nice to get this from the actual >> arch if possible to reduce redundancy. > > The attached patch w

Re: [uml-devel] linux-next: Tree for July 26 (uml)

2012-08-14 Thread David Howells
David Howells wrote: > I can certainly try pasting the lines from x86/Kconfig to uml/Kconfig.common > to switch the REL/RELA bits, but it would be nice to get this from the actual > arch if possible to reduce redundancy. The attached patch works. David --- diff --git a/arch/um/Kconfig.common b/

Re: [uml-devel] linux-next: Tree for July 26 (uml)

2012-08-14 Thread Richard Weinberger
Am 14.08.2012 16:51, schrieb David Howells: > Richard Weinberger wrote: > >> Is there no way to get this information from the UML subarch? >> Which is currently X86_32 or X86_64. > > Or ppc or ia64? Or are those defunct? Those are defunct. AFAIK viro is working on UML/ppc64. > I can certainly

Re: [uml-devel] linux-next: Tree for July 26 (uml)

2012-08-14 Thread David Howells
Richard Weinberger wrote: > Is there no way to get this information from the UML subarch? > Which is currently X86_32 or X86_64. Or ppc or ia64? Or are those defunct? I can certainly try pasting the lines from x86/Kconfig to uml/Kconfig.common to switch the REL/RELA bits, but it would be nice

Re: [uml-devel] linux-next: Tree for July 26 (uml)

2012-08-14 Thread Richard Weinberger
Am 14.08.2012 16:26, schrieb David Howells: > Rusty Russell wrote: > CC arch/x86/um/../kernel/module.o arch/x86/um/../kernel/module.c:96:5: error: redefinition of 'apply_relocate_add' include/linux/moduleloader.h:64:19: note: previous definition of 'apply_relocat

Re: [uml-devel] linux-next: Tree for July 26 (uml)

2012-08-14 Thread David Howells
Rusty Russell wrote: > > > CC arch/x86/um/../kernel/module.o > > > arch/x86/um/../kernel/module.c:96:5: error: redefinition of > > > 'apply_relocate_add' > > > include/linux/moduleloader.h:64:19: note: previous definition of > > > 'apply_relocate_add' was here > > > make[2]: *** [arch/x