This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: what if there's no __NR_oldmount nor __NR_mount?
- From: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>
- To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 08:21:44 +0100
- Subject: Re: what if there's no __NR_oldmount nor __NR_mount?
- References: <orof4ee85z.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com> writes:
> This patch fixes linux/umount.S such that it doesn't fail to assemble
> if an old-style umount syscall is not available at all. Ok?
In what situation would this happen?
If neither of these is available, the function has to be implemented
anyway as a dummy returning ENOSYS together with a stub-warning.
Andreas
>
> Index: ChangeLog
> 2003-03-14 Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
>
> * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/umount.S: Don't assume at least one
> of oldumount and umount must exist.
>
> Index: sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/umount.S
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/glibc/libc/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/umount.S,v
> retrieving revision 1.3
> diff -u -p -r1.3 umount.S
> --- sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/umount.S 20 Aug 1998 19:15:40 -0000 1.3
> +++ sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/umount.S 15 Jan 2003 15:30:21 -0000
> @@ -2,11 +2,16 @@
> changes. They simply rename old system calls. */
>
> #include <sysdep.h>
> -#ifdef __NR_oldumount
> +
> +#if defined __NR_oldumount || defined __NR_umount
> +
> +# ifdef __NR_oldumount
> PSEUDO (__umount, oldumount, 1)
> -#else
> +# else
> PSEUDO (__umount, umount, 1)
> -#endif
> +# endif
> ret
> PSEUDO_END(__umount)
> weak_alias (__umount, umount)
> +
> +#endif /* defined __NR_oldumount || defined __NR_umount */
--
Andreas Jaeger
SuSE Labs aj at suse dot de
private aj at arthur dot inka dot de
http://www.suse.de/~aj