Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 11:30:54 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Tijl Coosemans <tijl@ulyssis.org> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: [ports-sparc64@bento.FreeBSD.org: libticables-3.7.7_2 failed on sparc64 5] Message-ID: <20040511183054.GB33350@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20040511152304.201425e3.tijl@ulyssis.org> References: <20040511010823.GB72214@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040511152304.201425e3.tijl@ulyssis.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--/NkBOFFp2J2Af1nK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 03:23:04PM +0200, Tijl Coosemans wrote: > Apparently src/sys/sparc64/include/sysarch.h uses utrap_entry_t and > utrap_handler_t without defining them. They are however defined in > src/sys/sparc64/utrap.h. >=20 > So I'm wondering, should I file a PR for my port to include > machine/utrap.h before machine/sysarch.h in case of a sparc64 build > (or get rid of it since it is only used on i386), or should I file a > PR for src/sys/sparc64/include/sysarch.h to include machine/utrap.h > (probably wrapped inside an #ifndef _KERNEL)? Thanks for investigating the problem. You should ask for advice from the sparc64@ mailing list. Kris --/NkBOFFp2J2Af1nK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAoRveWry0BWjoQKURAtJNAJ4zw/gZ93PFYM7/BvvTfMQJ5B2NCwCeNtHD 8OI0ukrS+xZUhla3uM2mEPQ= =77EJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --/NkBOFFp2J2Af1nK--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040511183054.GB33350>