Re: libc6.1-dev: Conflicting definitions in linux/ptrace.h and sys/ptrace.h on ia64
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
affects 538916 +trafficserver
tags 538916 +upstream
thanks
Can confirm this problem almost two years later. In my case
trafficserver FTBS on IA64 because of this problem.
g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../lib/ts -I../iocore/eventsystem
- -I../iocore/net -I../iocore/aio -I../iocore/hostdb -I../iocore/cache
- -I../iocore/cluster -I../iocore/utils -I../iocore/dns -I../lib/records
- -I./http -I./logging -I./http/remap -I./hdrs -I../mgmt
- -I../mgmt/preparse -I../mgmt/utils -I./api/ts -I../lib
- -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE=1 -D_COMPILE64BIT_SOURCE=1 -D_GNU_SOURCE
- -D_REENTRANT -Dlinux -I/usr/include/tcl8.5 -g -O2 -pipe -Wall -O3
- -feliminate-unused-debug-symbols -fno-strict-aliasing
- -Wno-invalid-offsetof -MT CoreUtils.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/CoreUtils.Tpo -c
- -o CoreUtils.o CoreUtils.cc
In file included from /usr/include/asm/ptrace.h:58,
from CoreUtils.h:63,
from CoreUtils.cc:126:
/usr/include/asm/fpu.h:57: error: redefinition of 'struct ia64_fpreg'
/usr/include/bits/sigcontext.h:33: error: previous definition of 'struct
ia64_fpreg'
Problem is, both header define the same structure at different places
(and slightly different, though the result ought to be the same). One
belongs to libc6.1, one to the kernel headers:
in /usr/include/asm/fpu.h:
# ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
struct ia64_fpreg {
union {
unsigned long bits[2];
long double __dummy; /* force 16-byte alignment */
} u;
};
# endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
in /usr/include/bits/sigcontext.h:
struct ia64_fpreg
{
union
{
unsigned long bits[2];
} u;
} __attribute__ ((aligned (16)));
Maybe also the kernel headers are to blame. I can't tell who should
define the structure. Definitively not both though. Perhaps kernel
maintainers could tell more.
- --
with kind regards,
Arno Töll
GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJN0A8FAAoJEMcrUe6dgPNt+XEQANIuPg/apwYDKb74dtnzTx5s
JmDhUKzj6lpm4bN3mdy7BuBbksXeK8Pk5HmtQQxBMNYbXGnaacZqKKdVxWji0Qsg
D1VZwFKG0q1wQKsguEt09trD00BJTbnPp27sAVwrGhhW45sGSIrSWeH1+HMJKQNB
wbA9JUglgSSDdCYPUrlc15nLpY84uMWdE7NudjXB98g66f7OLuaMGMeb7x3Y6wAa
5IUZVD6CuJV2xFexRZh2vuITgb4MEZ0D74XXnGXQRI2Ld7yEEKElED9e4XFJ16xM
Zvfr0dYjJ4BxPvFOdYRbYDrHhhN4y6/3c0W/t0jiw1stXxDGJRtz0HnNrOFpKq9W
QLxjIVeSO7llA1MOx0NLb2QgrP1b2YsKWnLc8PpPLo2PPJt4XQF/hYszMLB32HV2
3E4uQ80xLv22hZHNyl/8Vflt/bD3fb/ujOq8m6ItjjySKPAXaGVRSKFVyrhazhXy
cCw4YI7q2sXViTL6uGHrTumr6Bi9GmC951/FO77wc8v1HQTn2R3sv0Tvyrp7SMrZ
UWYO6sPcr4tYkZx3obSMuksUjWRwc4nK7IY7jA8Ybo/TLOoBuuuCYbDsuerW0IoJ
Zur2pq96io8Fyjv90Tk2RavTNAoq5FaxYbhFz6LqGas1nSITmlNIRbaI6Sa9hKnq
tMcDaI0soS1RYki6TdDW
=oAwv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: