linux-kernel - Re: Linux 2.6.23-rc9 and a heads-up for the 2.6.24 series..

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20071005054117.GB25242@elte.hu>
Date:	Fri, 5 Oct 2007 07:41:18 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Glauber de Oliveira Costa <glommer@...il.com>
Cc:	Alistair John Strachan <alistair@...zero.co.uk>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.23-rc9 and a heads-up for the 2.6.24 series..


* Glauber de Oliveira Costa <glommer@...il.com> wrote:

> On 10/2/07, Alistair John Strachan <alistair@...zero.co.uk> wrote:
> > This is certainly a tool issue, but if I use Debian's kernel-image "make-kpkg"
> > wrapper around the kernel build system, it fails with:
> >
> > cp: cannot stat `arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage': No such file or directory
> >
> > Obviously, this file has moved to arch/x86/boot, but it seems like possibly
> > unnecessary breakage. I've been copying bzImage for years from
> > arch/x86_64/boot, and I'm sure there's a handful of scripts (other than
> > Debian's kernel-image) doing this too.
> 
> I believe most sane tools would be using the output of uname -m, so a 
> possible way to fix this would be fixing the data passed to userspace 
> from uname. However, that might be the case that it creates a new set 
> of problems too, with tools relying on the output of uname -m to 
> determine wheter the machine is 32 or 64 bit, and so on.

there are two problems with the use of uname -m:

- the build machine architecture is not necessarily the same as the
  target architecture. (for example i cross-compile all my 32-bit
  kernels on a 64-bit box.)

- we kept uname -m compatile. multilib depends on it, and other pieces
  of userspace as well. So uname -m still outputs 'i386' on 32-bit and
  'x86_64' on 64-bit - not 'x86'.

a symlink looks like the best solution to me.

	Ingo
-
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/