[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#389673: marked as done (linux-kernel-headers: Old version of asm-i386/unistd.h in source tarball (hides _syscall* macros))



Your message dated Tue, 03 Oct 2006 21:58:09 +1000
with message-id <45225051.7020206@bigpond.net.au>
and subject line Resolved, invalid
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--- Begin Message ---
Package: linux-kernel-headers
Version: 2.6.18-1
Severity: important

The linux-kernel-headers 2.6.18 source tarball contains an old version
of <include/asm-i386/unistd.h>. This old version has the _syscall*
macros hidden inside an #ifdef __KERNEL__ so userspace cannot use them.

The ifdef is on line 327. The source file was fixed in the following
patch:
<http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=386dcafaacd212ef4a8aeed67a7db3ffbb44c7b2>

According to the Changelog
(<http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ChangeLog-2.6.18>) it was
fixed between 2.6.18-rc5 and 2.6.18-rc6. I checked a couple of more
recent commits in include/asm-i386 and they are up-to-date in the source
tarball.

-Ted

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (990, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.17-2-686
Locale: LANG=de_DE.utf8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)

-- no debconf information


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks for the response. I am satisfied that this is an invalid bug
report -- I didn't look far enough initially.

-Ted

--- End Message ---

Reply to: