Re: Hint for autodir (closes RC) and comments about linux-kernel-headers
On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 12:17:12PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> After about 20 days of work with both autodir and autofs4 upstream
> a final fix for autodir is available (closes #399454).
> Incidentally 0.9.8 is almost the same of 0.9.7 (integrating my previous fix
> for an header file and an initial trial to fix the above bug) at upstream level
> and we are quite confident it does not impact stability in respect with 0.9.7.
> Just in case I could provide a 1:0.9.7-1 if required (0.9.7 was the last available
> version in testing AFAIK).
> About the fix, as communicated in #debian-kernel, just FYI:
> <frankie> FYI: #399454 is essentially a bug in the auto_fs4.h header
> file, as resulted by talking with autofs and autodir upstreams (API
> breakage due to a change in a union used both in v4 and
> v5). The issue potentially impact any program built on
> 2.6.17+ and depending on auto_fs4.h.
> <frankie> any program which still uses v4 protocol, indeed
> <frankie> autofs upstream is fixing on his side for the kernel, but I
> wonder if we need to fix as well etch linux-kernel-headers
> <frankie> of course this is not a problem for debian binaries, but i
> think developers would not appreciate a broken header in etch for their
> buildings and the issue is quite obscure
If the union is different between v4 and v5, what would a *fixed* header
look like? Is this anything other than picking which protocol to be
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.