Hello, At Fri, 31 May 2002 11:28:47 +0900 (JST), Atsushi Nemoto wrote: > takeshi_aihana> Is there any inconsistents on those conditions? > > AFAIK, Yes. For example, look struct ipc_perm in bits/ipc.h and > struct ipc64_perm in asm-mips/ipcbuf.h (not struct ipc_perm in > linux/ipc.h which is obsolete). I did to check both bits/shm.h (glibc-2.2.3), bits/shm.h (glibc-2.2.4) and asm-mips/shmbuf.h for calling shmctl(); There are any differences 'struct shmid_ds' between glibc-2.2.3 and 2.2.4 that I saw. However, I do not think those diffs are caused this problem. Because the 'shm_segsz` which a member of this will be allocated on same location even if the follows members behind 'shm_segsz' are changed; i.e. it will have same value as 'shm_segsz' on both different structure. Is this right? > If you can. Please do not forget rebuilding all applications which > including these headers. If you want to stay in 2.2.3, you will have > to modify your kernel headers according to the libc headers. I understood. It might to solve this problem as the most simple way. Thank you for your advice. Regards. --- (TAKESHI - MontaVista Software)
