On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 06:38:57AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday, November 29, 2010 05:53:36 Graham Gower wrote:
> > On 29 November 2010 20:50, Karel Zak wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 12:05:24PM +1030, Graham Gower wrote:
> > >> uClibc may be built without large file support (no llseek, lseek64,
> > >> etc).
> > >>
> > >> The below patch fixes things for me in this case. Patch is against 2.17,
> > >> but it doesn't look like the code has changed recently.
> > >>
> > >> --- util-linux-ng-2.17/shlibs/blkid/src/llseek.c.orig 2010-11-29
> > >> 11:31:49.000000000 +1030 +++
> > >> util-linux-ng-2.17/shlibs/blkid/src/llseek.c 2010-11-29
> > >> 11:52:07.000000000 +1030 @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@
> > >>
> > >> #include "blkidP.h"
> > >>
> > >> -#ifdef __linux__
> > >> +#if defined(__linux__) && !(defined(__UCLIBC__) &&
> > >> !defined(__USE_FILE_OFFSET64))
> > >
> > > Not sure...
> > >
> > >> #if defined(HAVE_LSEEK64) && defined(HAVE_LSEEK64_PROTOTYPE) ||
> > >> defined(__UCLIBC__)
> > >
> > > ... wouldn't be enough to use:
> > >
> > > #if defined(HAVE_LSEEK64) && defined(HAVE_LSEEK64_PROTOTYPE) || \
> > > defined(__UCLIBC__) && defined(__USE_FILE_OFFSET64)
> > >
> > > ?
> > >
> > > The code inside __linux__ conditional block seems useful
> > > independently on libc, it calls llseek syscall directly.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, I don't have uClib to test it. Mike, any comment?
> >
> > No. There is no llseek in the uClibc I have built. Hence falling back
> > to lseek was the route I took.
>
> Karel said "syscall", not "library function". i think his counter suggestion
> should work. although i'm not sure why this file checks __UCLIBC__ at all if
> there are proper configure tests for lseek64/llseek ...
Good point.
The __UCLIBC__ is unnecessary legacy from time when HAVE_LSEEK64* macros
wasn't properly defined. I've fixed this problem few months ago, but
I forgot to remove the __UCLIBC__ check. My mistake.
> testing against a uClibc w/LFS enabled shows that both HAVE_LSEEK64 and
> HAVE_LSEEK64_PROTOTYPE are defined as expected. i dont have a toolchain w/LFS
> disabled atm, but i could build up one if necessary.
> so my counter-counter-proposal is:
>
> --- a/shlibs/blkid/src/llseek.c
> +++ b/shlibs/blkid/src/llseek.c
> @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@
>
> #ifdef __linux__
>
> -#if defined(HAVE_LSEEK64) && defined(HAVE_LSEEK64_PROTOTYPE) || defined(__UCLIBC__)
> +#if defined(HAVE_LSEEK64) && defined(HAVE_LSEEK64_PROTOTYPE)
Applied, thanks.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux-ng" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
