linux-kernel - Re: [AC-Admin] Re: 2.6.23 alpha unistd.h changes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <46EFC2A8.9070009@linux-kernel.at>
Date:	Tue, 18 Sep 2007 14:20:56 +0200
From:	Oliver Falk <oliver@...ux-kernel.at>
To:	Sergey Tikhonov <tsv@...vo.ru>
CC:	Linux on Alpha processors <axp-list@...hat.com>,
	ac-admin@...ts.anotherbloody.com, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
	ink@...assic.park.msu.ru, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jay Estabrook <jay.estabrook@...com>
Subject: Re: [AC-Admin] Re: 2.6.23 alpha unistd.h changes

On 09/18/2007 11:11 AM, Sergey Tikhonov wrote:
> Oliver Falk wrote:
>> On 09/17/2007 11:22 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>>  
>>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 10:33:07PM +0200, Oliver Falk wrote:
>>>    
>>>> At Alphacore we used to patch the kernel headers for a while now; We
>>>> added syscalls __NR_openat (447) until __NR_tee (466).
>>>>       
>>> Why did your numbers differ from the numbers that were used in the
>>> upstream kernel?
>>>     
>>
>> Afaik, our patch was done a while ago and nobody every submitted it
>> upstream - don't know why...
>>   
> Yes, it was done by me and I had no info how to push the updates to
> upstream, sorry. (by that time,
> there were no latest "distribution" available with those changes).
>> At AC, we follow RH/Fedora packages and there we had glibc-kernheaders -
>> where our patch originates. When the glibc/kernel packages changed and
>> glibc-kernheaders died, I patched the syscalls into kernel headers; Not
>> thinking that I better submit it upstream. :-(
>>   
> Yea, now there is more interest and it is better to do it right. :)

To make it easy for everyone....

There should not be many AC users that run the latest versions of
everything.

I will keep the sorting of the syscalls as they are - no change required
upstream.

People who want new kernel or new glibc will then also need to update
the other. DOT. POINT. END. :-)

Kernel 2.6.23 will also require new aboot.... So many things....

Since online upgrading from AC3 to FC8axp will not be supported anyway
(because of various reasons and now 2 more of them), I can live with
that decision finally.

Thx everyone...

Best,
 Oliver
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/