Bug#1015719: libc6-dev: Build glibc with latest packaged kernel version
Hi,
On 2022-07-24 12:39, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote:
> Hi Aurelien,
>
> On 7/23/22 11:43, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2022-07-19 21:55, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > > Package: libc6-dev
> > > Version: 2.33-8
> > > Severity: normal
> > > X-Debbugs-Cc: alx.manpages@gmail.com
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We had a discussion in NGINX Unit about if we should use __NR_xxx
> > > or SYS_xxx syscall numbers. As maintainer of the Linux man-pages,
> > > I suggested that we should use the libc macros (SYS_xxx), since
> > > they are compatible with other non-Linux systems, and also because
> > > they are the documented way for user space. However, there was
> > > some concern that someone might be running a new kernel with an
> > > old glibc, and that __NR_xxx symbols might be available but not
> > > SYS_xxx in that case.
> >
> > Yes that sounds good.
> >
> > > Since the <bits/syscall.h> (included through <sys/syscall.h>)
> > > header is generated automatically from the kernel headers at glibc
> > > build time, Debian should make sure that the latest available
> > > kernel headers are used, so building the latest Sid glibc package
> > > should be done on a system with also the latest kernel available
> > > in Sid, to have a complete SYS_xxx list.
> >
> > This is basically what is done, the buildd chroots are updated twice a
> > week, so in the worst case glibc is build against a kernel headers
> > package that is 4 days old.
>
> Is it? I have kernel 5.18, but my bits/syscalls.h still says it was
> generated from kernel 5.10 (that's a long time ago). I have the latest Sid
> packages for both the kernel and glibc.
Yes, this is definitely the case, glibc 2.33-8 has been built against
linux-libc-dev 5.18.5-1. What is wrong is "header is generated
automatically from the kernel headers at glibc build time". They are
generated by upstream at release time, not at build time.
Regards
Aurelien
--
Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurelien@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
Reply to: