From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Egorenkov Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2020 17:35:39 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 1/1] package/makedumpfile: new package In-Reply-To: <20200903232648.6be84338@windsurf.home> References: <20200831111226.15764-1-egorenar-dev@posteo.net> <20200903232648.6be84338@windsurf.home> Message-ID: <87y2louth0.fsf@posteo.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net > elf_info.c: In function ?get_elf64_phnum?: > elf_info.c:1050:23: error: ?PN_XNUM? undeclared (first use in this function) > if (ehdr->e_phnum == PN_XNUM) { > ^ > elf_info.c:1050:23: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in > make[1]: *** [Makefile:90: elf_info.o] Error 1 > > PN_XNUM is defined in libelf/elf.h in the elfutils code base, but it > seems like this header file is only installed if elfutils is built with > --enable-install-elfh. However, I am not sure what would be the impact > of installing elf.h. Indeed, the kernel headers also have an elf.h file > in usr/include/linux/elf.h. > > Could you have a look into this ? Hmm, i checked the usr/include/linux/elf.h and it defines PN_XNUM but makedumpfile doesn't include this one and takes the one from glibc which is much bigger but doesn't contain this define, unfortunately. One option would be to patch makedumpfile and define PN_XNUM if it not yet defined, not sure whether this the way you want to go ? At least we wouldn't possibly break any other packages. What do you think ? This is just stupid, why would elfutils override glibc's elf.h, sigh. Thanks for feedback Regards Alex