From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17652 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2012 13:15:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 17644 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Aug 2012 13:14:59 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-vb0-f41.google.com (HELO mail-vb0-f41.google.com) (209.85.212.41) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 13:14:46 +0000 Received: by vbkv13 with SMTP id v13so3203381vbk.0 for ; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 06:14:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.58.228.233 with SMTP id sl9mr7415701vec.5.1344777285901; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 06:14:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.236.198 with HTTP; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 06:14:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1334271665-31914-1-git-send-email-vapier@gentoo.org> <201204121926.51186.vapier@gentoo.org> <20120413035854.BF0642C079@topped-with-meat.com> <201208111527.37505.vapier@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 13:15:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] hppa: add missing prlimit64 symbol From: "Carlos O'Donell" To: "Joseph S. Myers" Cc: Mike Frysinger , Roland McGrath , libc-ports@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact libc-ports-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-ports-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-08/txt/msg00101.txt.bz2 On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Sat, 11 Aug 2012, Mike Frysinger wrote: > >> while the 32bit arches have: >> prlimit64 EXTRA prlimit64 i:iipp prlimit64 > >> so the next thing i tried was creating >> sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/wordsize-32/syscalls.list and adding the new prlimit >> alias there. but a simple i686 build doesn't pick up the new location of the >> prlimit64 symbol. > > Well, it wouldn't be an *alias*; it would be the prlimit64 entry above. > But, if the point is to fix things for hppa then you need to arrange for > hppa to get a GLIBC_2.17 version for prlimit64, not the default GLIBC_2.13 > since in fact the function was missing in 2.13 for hppa - as noted in > point (v) for hppa in my list at > . (The lack of > ABI baselines - which of course ought to be checked against binaries of > old releases when set up - is point (g) on that list, and (x) is another > point involving checks against old binaries.) > > (Adding the entry, but with @@GLIBC_2.17 like the SH fanotify_mark, to the > hppa syscalls.list along with an appropriate Versions entry, is certainly > the safer approach than doing something with the potential to affect other > architectures, even though it may also be good to work out how to clean > these things up. Note hppa also needs fanotify_mark at a new version, and > note that cleanups here only help existing architectures; there are no > issues for new architectures using linux-generic because linux-generic > already has the right entries in syscalls.list.) I've been spending the weekend bringing up new hardware for my hppa testing, so hopefully I can get back to tackling the maintenance backlog (along with any 2.15 and 2.16 backport requests). Cheers, Carlos.