Based on my (admittedly extremely limited) understanding of things, this seems correct as is:
#if defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__aarch64__)
case __NR_newfstatat: // fstatat(). EPERM not a valid errno.
#elif defined(__i386__) || defined(__arm__) || \
(defined(ARCH_CPU_MIPS_FAMILY) && defined(ARCH_CPU_32_BITS))
case __NR_fstatat64:
#endif
case __NR_newfstatat: // fstatat(). EPERM not a valid errno.
#elif defined(__i386__) || defined(__arm__) || \
(defined(ARCH_CPU_MIPS_FAMILY) && defined(ARCH_CPU_32_BITS))
case __NR_fstatat64:
#endif
Is fstatat64 actually implemented on x86_64 now?
Alternately, if you'd prefer to simply open an upstream bug with Google, just let me know. :) I want to be helpful here, but not waste your time.
Thanks,
~spot
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
