From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754695AbZCERnH (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Mar 2009 12:43:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754231AbZCERmv (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Mar 2009 12:42:51 -0500 Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com ([209.85.200.169]:64654 "EHLO wf-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754024AbZCERmu convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Mar 2009 12:42:50 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=b/GLivUCGTIWY3p/Elptp5A4lwhrSLHJdpB83CKhqbu/LBJx3UO4Kef2I7SM0eIQPz VigjwlfsqOpA03gYRCg1T725VXL+fl3g2fRD7GOY20jo2mCz7U1P7Hy/46IaS9ObvWtm 9HEtqkquniETOsF3BDlhrhH0LOU+DRR7E400c= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <49AFF0D7.8080007@oracle.com> References: <20090305060436.GA5359@nowhere> <49AFF0D7.8080007@oracle.com> Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 09:42:48 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] unifdef.c change "getline" to "get_line" to avoid C library confusion. From: Justin Mattock To: Randy Dunlap Cc: Frederic Weisbecker , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , Mike Frysinger Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote: >> From: Justin P. Mattock >> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock >> >> This fixes an error when compiling the kernel. > > Did you determine why you need this now and other people don't > need it (yet)?  Maybe the rest of us will need it in the future... > > >>  CHK     include/linux/version.h >>  HOSTCC  scripts/unifdef >> scripts/unifdef.c:209: error: conflicting types for 'getline' >> /usr/include/stdio.h:651: note: previous declaration of 'getline' was here >> make[1]: *** [scripts/unifdef] Error 1 >> make: *** [__headers] Error 2 >> >> -- >> scripts/unifdef.c  |  3 +++ >> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+),0 deletions(-) >> >> ---a/scripts/unifdef.c                2009-03-05 00:07:28.000000000 -0800 >> +++b/scripts/unifdef.c        2009-03-05 00:04:56.000000000 -0800 >> @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ static void             done(void); >>  static void             error(const char *); >>  static int              findsym(const char *); >>  static void             flushline(bool); >> -static Linetype         getline(void); >> +static Linetype         get_line(void); >>  static Linetype         ifeval(const char **); >>  static void             ignoreoff(void); >>  static void             ignoreon(void); >> @@ -512,7 +512,7 @@ process(void) >> >>       for (;;) { >>               linenum++; >> -             lineval = getline(); >> +             lineval = get_line(); >>               trans_table[ifstate[depth]][lineval](); >>               debug("process %s -> %s depth %d", >>                   linetype_name[lineval], >> @@ -526,7 +526,7 @@ process(void) >>   * help from skipcomment(). >>   */ >>  static Linetype >> -getline(void) >> +get_line(void) >>  { >>       const char *cp; >>       int cursym; >> >> > > > -- > ~Randy > As for why I need this: I keep getting an error while compiling the latest kernel. (changing getline to get_line fixes it from here); As for others needing this: probably in the category for future use. especially if people don't upgrade there kernel and libc. In speculation though, people may never hit this. The setup I did was created an LFS system(always wanted to create a linux system from source). While creating this starting with a plain directory, then compiling make, gcc, libc, making sure to set CFLAGS, (in accordance to the processor) then after those were complete, set the same CFLAGS for every lib/app that I compiled and put into the system. (this way the system is atomically synchronized with the processor); Thus changing the whole setup that I have. But then If this was the case I would of hit this probably earlier with 2.6.29-rc4/5. In regards to the patch(to make things correct) what or how do I label this person in the patch so they get the proper credit: vapier@gentoo.org They were responsible with providing the change of getline to get_line. should it be: Critical-info-by: Mike Frysinger And also adding the people who reviewed the patch. This way the patch is proper irregardless of the patch making it or not. regards; -- Justin P. Mattock