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

Bug#357545: linux-source-2.6.15: local redeclaration of name_to_dev_t in drivers/mtd/devices/blkmtd.c

Package: linux-source-2.6.15
Version: 2.6.15-8
Severity: normal
Tags: patch

There is a local redeclaration of name_to_dev_t in
drivers/mtd/devices/blkmtd.c:617 which is inconsistant with the function in mount.h.

The way to fix this would be to remove the declaration and include the
mount.h as the attached patch does. 

Note: this issue appears in the upstream kernel as well, and I believe
it should be fixed there as well. I hope that coming from the debian
kernel people it will be received.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.15-1-686-smp
Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1)

Versions of packages linux-source-2.6.15 depends on:
ii  binutils             2.16.1cvs20060117-1 The GNU assembler, linker and bina
ii  bzip2                1.0.3-2             high-quality block-sorting file co

Versions of packages linux-source-2.6.15 recommends:
ii  gcc                      4:4.0.2-2       The GNU C compiler
ii  libc6-dev [libc-dev]     2.3.6-3         GNU C Library: Development Librari
ii  make                     3.80+3.81.rc1-1 The GNU version of the "make" util

-- no debconf information
--- drivers/mtd/devices/blkmtd.c	2006-01-02 22:21:10.000000000 -0500
+++ /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.15/drivers/mtd/devices/blkmtd.c	2006-03-17 19:03:21.000000000 -0500
@@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
 #include <linux/list.h>
 #include <linux/init.h>
 #include <linux/mtd/mtd.h>
+#include <linux/mount.h>
 #define err(format, arg...) printk(KERN_ERR "blkmtd: " format "\n" , ## arg)
@@ -614,8 +615,6 @@
-extern dev_t __init name_to_dev_t(const char *line);
 static struct blkmtd_dev *add_device(char *devname, int readonly, int erase_size)
 	struct block_device *bdev;

Reply to: