| To: | Petr Salinger <Petr.Salinger@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Bug#531950: attr: FTBFS on GNU/kFreeBSD |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 9 Jun 2009 08:10:42 -0400 |
| Cc: | agruen@xxxxxxx, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, 531950-quiet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Nathan Scott <nscott@xxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.62.0906091328270.31325@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <364917872.6081221244543493694.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0906091328270.31325@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 01:35:58PM +0200, Petr Salinger wrote: > The problem is that there is no ENODATA errno value defined > on GNU/kFreeBSD. The errno values are determined by kernel, > they are the same as on plain FreeBSD, used libc > implementation does not change it. > > Another possibility is to use patch bellow. > Does it looks acceptable for you ? This one looks better to me, except that I would really make this an explicit #ifdef __linux__. The lack of a proper ENOATTR is a Linux specific quirck and not related to the presence of non-standard ENODATA. Maybe also add a little comment why we're doing this so people don't get confused by it. Btw, how does libattr actually work for you on FreeBSD? Last time I checked FreeBSD had slightly different xattr system calls that (just like IRIX) used an integer namespace value instead of the string prefix in Linux. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Bug#531950: attr: FTBFS on GNU/kFreeBSD, Petr Salinger |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | XFS status update for May 2009, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Bug#531950: attr: FTBFS on GNU/kFreeBSD, Petr Salinger |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Bug#531950: attr: FTBFS on GNU/kFreeBSD, Aurelien Jarno |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |