linux-kernel - Re: m68k build failure

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]

Date:	Wed, 28 Nov 2007 10:07:59 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Pierre Ossman <drzeus@...eus.cx>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
	Linux Kernel Development <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Linux/m68k" <linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: m68k build failure

> Delightful. So what are the options here? Start packing the device table structs is the obvious quick fix. Declaring cross-compilation unsupported isn't really viable, and I guess determining padding differences is far from easy.

There are some ugly options:

Cross compile a test object containing nothing but

	struct whatever fred;

then dump it with the relevant cross nm

-
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/