* 2.6.10 typo in include/linux/netfilter.h
@ 2004-12-26 9:17 Nick Warne
2004-12-26 10:32 ` David S. Miller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Nick Warne @ 2004-12-26 9:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Breaks the build.
Line 161
/* Call setsockopt() */
int nf_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int pf, int optval, char __user *opt,
int len(; <-------
Nick
--
"When you're chewing on life's gristle,
Don't grumble, Give a whistle..."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.6.10 typo in include/linux/netfilter.h
2004-12-26 9:17 2.6.10 typo in include/linux/netfilter.h Nick Warne
@ 2004-12-26 10:32 ` David S. Miller
2004-12-26 10:59 ` Nick Warne
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: David S. Miller @ 2004-12-26 10:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nick Warne; +Cc: linux-kernel
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 09:17:38 +0000
Nick Warne <nick@linicks.net> wrote:
> Breaks the build.
>
> Line 161
>
> /* Call setsockopt() */
> int nf_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int pf, int optval, char __user *opt,
> int len(; <-------
That doesn't exist in the 2.6.10 sources. Something is
up with the source tree you have. Lots of people would
be complaining if this simplistic error were actually
in the real 2.6.10 tree.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.6.10 typo in include/linux/netfilter.h
2004-12-26 10:32 ` David S. Miller
@ 2004-12-26 10:59 ` Nick Warne
2004-12-26 11:20 ` Roman Ivanchukov
2004-12-26 15:50 ` Gene Heskett
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Nick Warne @ 2004-12-26 10:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David S. Miller; +Cc: linux-kernel
On Sunday 26 December 2004 10:32, David S. Miller wrote:
> > Line 161
> >
> > /* Call setsockopt() */
> > int nf_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int pf, int optval, char __user *opt,
> > int len(; <-------
>
> That doesn't exist in the 2.6.10 sources. Something is
> up with the source tree you have. Lots of people would
> be complaining if this simplistic error were actually
> in the real 2.6.10 tree.
Yes, I thought strange, but this is the full tar.bz2 from kernel.org - I
downloaded this morning about 2 hours ago.
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/linux-2.6.10.tar.bz2
Nick
--
"When you're chewing on life's gristle,
Don't grumble, Give a whistle..."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.6.10 typo in include/linux/netfilter.h
2004-12-26 10:59 ` Nick Warne
@ 2004-12-26 11:20 ` Roman Ivanchukov
2004-12-26 11:36 ` Nick Warne
2004-12-26 15:50 ` Gene Heskett
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Roman Ivanchukov @ 2004-12-26 11:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nick Warne; +Cc: David S. Miller, linux-kernel
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 10:59:57 +0000
Nick Warne <nick@linicks.net> wrote:
> > > Line 161
> > >
> > > /* Call setsockopt() */
> > > int nf_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int pf, int optval, char __user *opt,
> > > int len(; <-------
> >
> > That doesn't exist in the 2.6.10 sources. Something is
> > up with the source tree you have. Lots of people would
> > be complaining if this simplistic error were actually
> > in the real 2.6.10 tree.
>
> Yes, I thought strange, but this is the full tar.bz2 from kernel.org - I
> downloaded this morning about 2 hours ago.
>
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/linux-2.6.10.tar.bz2
>
I've just downloaded linux-2.6.10.tar.bz2 from kernel.org and there is no such
error in netfilter.h:
/* Call setsockopt() */
int nf_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int pf, int optval, char __user *opt,
int len);
--
WBR, Roman
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.6.10 typo in include/linux/netfilter.h
2004-12-26 11:20 ` Roman Ivanchukov
@ 2004-12-26 11:36 ` Nick Warne
2004-12-26 11:41 ` Grahame White
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Nick Warne @ 2004-12-26 11:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
On Sunday 26 December 2004 11:20, Roman Ivanchukov wrote:
Strange - really strange. I was specific on that line as that is what GCC
told me error was - and it was here.
> I've just downloaded linux-2.6.10.tar.bz2 from kernel.org and there is no
> such error in netfilter.h:
>
> /* Call setsockopt() */
> int nf_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int pf, int optval, char __user *opt,
> int len);
I just DL'ed the tar.gz - that is OK.
The image build I done (using oldconfig) booted, but wouldn't mount disks, and
a few other errors (like looking for modules - I don't build with modules).
What on earth could cause that then? Corrupt download? I would have thought
nigh on impossible to get one or two errors like that if so?
Nick
--
"When you're chewing on life's gristle,
Don't grumble, Give a whistle..."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.6.10 typo in include/linux/netfilter.h
2004-12-26 11:36 ` Nick Warne
@ 2004-12-26 11:41 ` Grahame White
2004-12-26 12:11 ` Florian Weimer
2004-12-26 16:04 ` Gene Heskett
2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Grahame White @ 2004-12-26 11:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
On Sunday 26 December 2004 11:36, Nick Warne wrote:
> On Sunday 26 December 2004 11:20, Roman Ivanchukov wrote:
>
> Strange - really strange. I was specific on that line as that is what
> GCC told me error was - and it was here.
>
> > I've just downloaded linux-2.6.10.tar.bz2 from kernel.org and there is
> > no such error in netfilter.h:
> >
> > /* Call setsockopt() */
> > int nf_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int pf, int optval, char __user
> > *opt, int len);
>
> I just DL'ed the tar.gz - that is OK.
>
> The image build I done (using oldconfig) booted, but wouldn't mount
> disks, and a few other errors (like looking for modules - I don't build
> with modules).
>
> What on earth could cause that then? Corrupt download? I would have
> thought nigh on impossible to get one or two errors like that if so?
>
> Nick
Did you try checking the md5 of the tar.bz2?
Grahame
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.6.10 typo in include/linux/netfilter.h
2004-12-26 11:36 ` Nick Warne
2004-12-26 11:41 ` Grahame White
@ 2004-12-26 12:11 ` Florian Weimer
2004-12-26 16:04 ` Gene Heskett
2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Florian Weimer @ 2004-12-26 12:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nick Warne; +Cc: linux-kernel
* Nick Warne:
> I just DL'ed the tar.gz - that is OK.
>
> The image build I done (using oldconfig) booted, but wouldn't mount disks, and
> a few other errors (like looking for modules - I don't build with modules).
>
> What on earth could cause that then? Corrupt download?
Probably that, or a flipped bit on your system.
You should download the .tar.bz2 file again and compare it to the
first one.
> I would have thought nigh on impossible to get one or two errors
> like that if so?
The TCP checksum does not guard against systematic bit errors in
router memory chips, unfortunately.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.6.10 typo in include/linux/netfilter.h
2004-12-26 10:59 ` Nick Warne
2004-12-26 11:20 ` Roman Ivanchukov
@ 2004-12-26 15:50 ` Gene Heskett
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Gene Heskett @ 2004-12-26 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: Nick Warne, David S. Miller
On Sunday 26 December 2004 05:59, Nick Warne wrote:
>On Sunday 26 December 2004 10:32, David S. Miller wrote:
>> > Line 161
>> >
>> > /* Call setsockopt() */
>> > int nf_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int pf, int optval, char
>> > __user *opt, int len(; <-------
>>
>> That doesn't exist in the 2.6.10 sources. Something is
>> up with the source tree you have. Lots of people would
>> be complaining if this simplistic error were actually
>> in the real 2.6.10 tree.
>
>Yes, I thought strange, but this is the full tar.bz2 from kernel.org
> - I downloaded this morning about 2 hours ago.
>
>http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/linux-2.6.10.tar.bz2
>
>Nick
I've had troubles of that nature when getting the .bz2's in a past
life, so I normally get the .gz's and have had no reccurances of such
little gotchas.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.30% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.6.10 typo in include/linux/netfilter.h
2004-12-26 11:36 ` Nick Warne
2004-12-26 11:41 ` Grahame White
2004-12-26 12:11 ` Florian Weimer
@ 2004-12-26 16:04 ` Gene Heskett
2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Gene Heskett @ 2004-12-26 16:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: Nick Warne
On Sunday 26 December 2004 06:36, Nick Warne wrote:
>On Sunday 26 December 2004 11:20, Roman Ivanchukov wrote:
>
>Strange - really strange. I was specific on that line as that is
> what GCC told me error was - and it was here.
>
>> I've just downloaded linux-2.6.10.tar.bz2 from kernel.org and
>> there is no such error in netfilter.h:
>>
>> /* Call setsockopt() */
>> int nf_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int pf, int optval, char __user
>> *opt, int len);
>
>I just DL'ed the tar.gz - that is OK.
>
>The image build I done (using oldconfig) booted, but wouldn't mount
> disks, and a few other errors (like looking for modules - I don't
> build with modules).
>
>What on earth could cause that then? Corrupt download? I would
> have thought nigh on impossible to get one or two errors like that
> if so?
>
>Nick
The only problem I've had was the one I posted about earlier,
something locked up amandad and this server didn't get backed up till
I rebooted & reran amdump about 4ish this morning. That was after
about 29 hrs uptime. It also claimed that a samba share I had
mounted was busy(but that machine had been powered down for the
night), and kpm was complaining about a lack of a dcopserver so it
couldn't connect to the system to monitor anything. htop worked as
expected though. Now I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop. If it
does, I'll go back to Ingo's last realtime-preempt patch. That was
solid, & had an 8 day uptime when I rebooted to 2.6.10.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.30% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-12-26 16:04 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-12-26 9:17 2.6.10 typo in include/linux/netfilter.h Nick Warne
2004-12-26 10:32 ` David S. Miller
2004-12-26 10:59 ` Nick Warne
2004-12-26 11:20 ` Roman Ivanchukov
2004-12-26 11:36 ` Nick Warne
2004-12-26 11:41 ` Grahame White
2004-12-26 12:11 ` Florian Weimer
2004-12-26 16:04 ` Gene Heskett
2004-12-26 15:50 ` Gene Heskett
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox