From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LwBRf-0000vi-AI
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Apr 2009 04:35:11 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LwBRa-0000uE-4F
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Apr 2009 04:35:10 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56332 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LwBRZ-0000u7-TW
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Apr 2009 04:35:05 -0400
Received: from mail-fx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.220.169]:49707)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <laurent.desnogues@gmail.com>) id 1LwBRZ-0004U1-If
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Apr 2009 04:35:05 -0400
Received: by mail-fx0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 17so2125936fxm.34
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 21 Apr 2009 01:35:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87ws9ee742.fsf@lechat.rtp-net.org>
References: <E1Lu7ig-0007Ez-1h@cvs.savannah.gnu.org>
	<761ea48b0904210056w37100e85tcf71162c84e961d1@mail.gmail.com>
	<87ws9ee742.fsf@lechat.rtp-net.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:35:05 +0200
Message-ID: <761ea48b0904210135u50d8b7c3r5cdd8e28fd5cefdd@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [7118] linux-user: prefer glibc over direct syscalls
From: Laurent Desnogues <laurent.desnogues@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Arnaud Patard <arnaud.patard@rtp-net.org>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Arnaud Patard
<arnaud.patard@rtp-net.org> wrote:
>
> This utimensat change is broken, I've sent a patch to revert to the
> syscall interface. As a side effect, it'll bring back the check :
>
> #if defined(TARGET_NR_utimensat) && defined(__NR_utimensat)
>
> It will likely solve your trouble. Lets hope the patch will be merged :)

Yes, that fixes it. Thanks.

>>
>> For the record I am running CentOS 5.3 x86_64.
>
> hmm... glibc older than 2.6 or kernel older than 2.6.22 ?

Indeed: glibc 2.5 and kernel 2.6.18.


Laurent