On Sat, 24 Nov 2012, Stefan Priebe wrote: > Am 24.11.2012 18:16, schrieb Sage Weil: > > On Sat, 24 Nov 2012, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > > > At the machine compiling? Yes! > > > > Hmm, I just tested on my wonky wheezy machine (glibc 2.13, 3.2) and > > system(SYS_syncfs, ..) works for me. But the #define is in libc6-dev: > > But that means your glibc supports it. Then we don't need the syscall at > all. > > To me it's only present in the kernel headers (linux-libc-dev) like > this: > > [pb64: ~]# grep -r syncfs /usr/include > /usr/include/asm/unistd_64.h:#define __NR_syncfs 306 > /usr/include/asm/unistd_64.h:__SYSCALL(__NR_syncfs, sys_syncfs) > /usr/include/asm/unistd_32.h:#define __NR_syncfs 344 > /usr/include/asm-generic/unistd.h:#define __NR_syncfs 267 > /usr/include/asm-generic/unistd.h:__SYSCALL(__NR_syncfs, sys_syncfs) Can try wip-syncfs? It checks for either SYS_syncfs or __NR_syncfs. sage -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
