On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 09:37:02PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:> I assume this is intended to fix a build error caused by patches in the > earlier set which added more reliance on mach-default?i386 ptrace.h now includes <mach/segment.h>. Its system.h now includes <mach/mach_system.h>, so UML needs access to them until I break these linkages. Jeff
* zach@vmware.com (zach@vmware.com) wrote:> Attempt to fix the UML build by assuming the default i386 subarchitecture > (mach-default). > > I can't fully test this because spinlock breakage is still happening in > my tree, but it gets rid of the mach_xxx.h missing file warnings.I assume this is intended to fix a build error caused by patches in the earlier set which added more reliance on mach-default? thanks, -chris
Chris Wright wrote:>* zach@vmware.com (zach@vmware.com) wrote: > > >>Attempt to fix the UML build by assuming the default i386 subarchitecture >>(mach-default). >> >>I can't fully test this because spinlock breakage is still happening in >>my tree, but it gets rid of the mach_xxx.h missing file warnings. >> >> > >I assume this is intended to fix a build error caused by patches in the >earlier set which added more reliance on mach-default? > >Yes, I already sent the fix to Jeff and Andrew, so it may already included in anything based off -mm1. But it seems a good idea in general for UML. I got a 100% clean um-i386 build after this patch on -rc5-mm1. Zach