Re: [AC-Admin] Re: 2.6.23 alpha unistd.h changes

Oliver Falk
2007-09-18T12:23:18Z

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