On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 07:19:24PM +0200, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > Hello Dave Reisner! > > On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 12:52:26PM -0400, Dave Reisner wrote: > > Is this really correct? Seems to me like the check should simply be > > removed. In sys-utils/pivot_root.c, we have the following: > > > > #define pivot_root(new_root,put_old) syscall(SYS_pivot_root,new_root,put_old) > > > > So, the subsequent check for the syscall seems like the only necessary > > check needed. As is, I think that u-l now fails to build in places where > > the pivot_root wrapper doesn't exist in the libc, but the syscall exists > > (does such a platform even exist?). > > I cought this when trying to build on Debian GNU/kFreeBSD (with incorrect > configure flags for that platform) where the SYS_pivot_root check > failed the build. > Not knowing anything about non-linux architectures myself it was not obvious > to me why this was. > > Passing --disable-pivot_root fixed the build and it would be more > obvious that this is the correct thing to do if it was pointed out that > this is only expected to work on Linux. > I consider the UL_REQUIRES_LINUX check as a more obvious > way to point out this error so people like myself doesn't need to > spend so much time scratching their heads over this. > > From what I can tell, Linux is the only system offering this syscall anyway. > Do you know of any non-linux system offering this? > If not, then I think the check is still correct and helpful. Ah, I wrongly assumed what UL_REQUIRES_LINUX does. Makes more sense having now read the .m4 file, and I agree with your fix. d -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
