linux-kernel - 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: <p734phsxteh.fsf@bingen.suse.de>
Date:	18 Sep 2007 10:35:50 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Linux on Alpha processors <axp-list@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jay Estabrook <jay.estabrook@...com>,
	ac-admin@...ts.anotherbloody.com
Subject: Re: 2.6.23 alpha unistd.h changes

Oliver Falk <oliver@...ux-kernel.at> writes:

> At Alphacore we used to patch the kernel headers for a while now; We
> added syscalls __NR_openat (447) until __NR_tee (466).
> 
> However, since 2.6.23 these syscall where added upstream, but with
> different syscall numbers; What happens is the following:
> 
> * glibc 2.6.90 compiled with 2.6.23 headers installed
> * kernel 2.6.21 (our patched headers in place, different syscall
> 'ordering'/numbers) installed
> 
> [root@...kie ~]# uname -r; touch x; rm -f x
> 2.6.23-0.145.rc4.fc8
> rm: cannot remove `x': File exists
> 
> :-( I don't want to live without rm :-P and chmod doesn't work as well...

It's all your own fault. Only mainline can assign syscall numbers.
See it as a learning experience. Next time when you assign them
you shouldn't use them before the patch has reached mainline.

-Andi
-
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/