Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\/usr\/src\/linux\/Documentation\/networking\/ifenslave\.c\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\/usr\/src\/linux\/Documentation\/networking\/ifenslave\.c\s*$/: 16 ]

Total 16 documents matching your query.

1. /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 11:23:54 +0200; $SUBJECT is a userspace tool, but includes kernel headers. This small obvious patch against 2.6.0-test1 should fix it. -- ifenslave.c +++ ifenslave.c @@ -97,8 +97,7 @@ include <sys/types.h> include <; /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg00370.html (8,501 bytes)
2. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 05:42:55 -0700; This patch is absolutely senseless, you eliminate two such includes but three more still remain. This whole anti-kernel-headers-in-userspace thing is a total shamans dance and not founded in reality.; /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg00371.html (9,112 bytes)
3. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 14:59:10 +0200; * David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> [Jul 16. 2003 14:52]: Urgs. Problem is some of these includes are different on different archs, and causes the thing to miscompile. How to fix that then? -- Mads; /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg00372.html (9,310 bytes)
4. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 06:10:13 -0700; Nothing arch specific resides in linux/if.h :-) This means the problem eminates from asm/*.h headers which is where the fixes belong. What exactly is the error you get on ia64?; /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg00374.html (8,905 bytes)
5. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: æ˜Ž <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:35:14 +0200; * David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> [Jul 16. 2003 15:21]: Yes. What fix, would you propose? a bunch of compile errors like the following: In file included from /usr/src/linux/include/asm/system.h:19; /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg00375.html (10,761 bytes)
6. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: Martin Jørgensen <mmj@xxxxxxx; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 06:28:33 -0700; IA64 needs it's __KERNEL__ ifdefs fixed up, nothing more. Thanks for finding the right place to fix this problem :-); /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg00376.html (9,361 bytes)
7. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 10:12:06 -0400; There ARE definitions that differ between kernel and userspace. Thinking they are the same is not founded in reality. And thinking that all of userspace is instantly recompiled against against the la; /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg00377.html (8,872 bytes)
8. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: ds Martin Jørgensen <mmj@xxxxxxx; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 07:14:26 -0700; Sure, but none of the one's were talking about here. I'm not. GLIBC is munging netlink messages on the way out via sendmsg()? That'd be news to me. :-); /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg00378.html (8,883 bytes)
9. /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: Mads Martin Jørgensen <mmj@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 11:23:54 +0200; $SUBJECT is a userspace tool, but includes kernel headers. This small obvious patch against 2.6.0-test1 should fix it. -- ifenslave.c +++ ifenslave.c @@ -97,8 +97,7 @@ include <sys/types.h> include <; /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg01059.html (8,516 bytes)
10. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 05:42:55 -0700; This patch is absolutely senseless, you eliminate two such includes but three more still remain. This whole anti-kernel-headers-in-userspace thing is a total shamans dance and not founded in reality.; /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg01060.html (9,172 bytes)
11. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: Mads Martin Jørgensen <mmj@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 14:59:10 +0200; * David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> [Jul 16. 2003 14:52]: Urgs. Problem is some of these includes are different on different archs, and causes the thing to miscompile. How to fix that then? -- Mads; /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg01061.html (9,429 bytes)
12. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 06:10:13 -0700; Nothing arch specific resides in linux/if.h :-) This means the problem eminates from asm/*.h headers which is where the fixes belong. What exactly is the error you get on ia64?; /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg01063.html (9,032 bytes)
13. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: Mads Martin Jørgensen <mmj@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:35:14 +0200; * David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> [Jul 16. 2003 15:21]: Yes. What fix, would you propose? a bunch of compile errors like the following: In file included from /usr/src/linux/include/asm/system.h:19; /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg01064.html (10,947 bytes)
14. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 06:28:33 -0700; IA64 needs it's __KERNEL__ ifdefs fixed up, nothing more. Thanks for finding the right place to fix this problem :-); /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg01065.html (9,553 bytes)
15. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 10:12:06 -0400; There ARE definitions that differ between kernel and userspace. Thinking they are the same is not founded in reality. And thinking that all of userspace is instantly recompiled against against the la; /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg01066.html (8,976 bytes)
16. Re: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ifenslave.c (score: 1): Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 07:14:26 -0700; Sure, but none of the one's were talking about here. I'm not. GLIBC is munging netlink messages on the way out via sendmsg()? That'd be news to me. :-); /archives/netdev/2003-07/msg01067.html (9,008 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 16
Page: [1]