Patch for strace 4.5.17, problems with strace 4.5.18

[Yann E. MORIN]

Hello Michael!
Hello crossgcc and strace-devel! :-)

On Thursday 23 October 2008 16:34:53 Michael Abbott wrote:
> For ARM EABI target, the two most recent strace releases fail to compile.  
> The attached patch is a condensation of 
> 	http://marc.info/?l=strace&m=120126455227098&w=2
> which was partially applied to 4.5.17, and fully incorporated into 4.5.18 
> ... but that still doesn't work!

4.5.17 is not available with stock crosstool-NG. Do you think it's worth
adding, when 4.5.18 is already there? On my side, I will focus on 4.5.18,
but you are welcome to come up with patches for 4.5.17, of course! :-)

> The compiler I'm using is arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi, built using 
> crosstool-ng, and targeting a recent linux 2.6.  For strace 4.5.17 the 
> compile fails for obvious reasons when the patch below is inspected!

Well. Seems that with 2.6.26 some headers are no longer exported to userspace
and strace relied on those...

> When attempting to compile strace 4.5.18:
> 	$ ./configure --host=arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi
> 	$ make
> [... snip ...]
> 	In file included from syscall.c:129:
> 	linux/arm/syscallent.h:435:3: error: #error fix me
> [... snip ...]
> 	make: *** [build] Error 2

Yep. I don't know what to do about it. So, subcall_(foobar) is not defined
to be 400. It's not even defined. ARM OABI has it, but the code explicitly
refuses to define it for some archs, of which ARM EABI. Why? Why not?
Pffiou... I have no clue there... :-(

> For crosstool-ng it should be possible to build strace 4.5.17 using this 
> patch, certainly seems to work fine for me.  I've not yet dug into what's 
> wrong with 4.5.18 -- it looks as if this patch is now fully incorporated 
> into the source tree, but unfortunately something is still broken.

So, you're saying that the patch below makes strace-4.5.17 build _and_ work
as expected? Sounds like a good reason to add 4.5.17 suport in crosstool-NG,
until we can make 4.5.18 be functional.

> Yann, if you like I can prepare a patch against crosstool-ng for this, but 
> I suspect you can do it much more quickly than I can!

Well, throwing patches against components is much appreciated! Thank you!
But it would be much easier for me if you could send patches against
crosstool-NG directly, so I don't have the burden to creating directories,
copying patches around, and so on...

Ideally, you would "svn co" the trunk, create the needed directory tree, add
the patches, and "svn diff" your working copy. That shouldn't be a lot on your
side, and I would be relieved on doing this every time a new patch comes in...

> Patch follows.
[--SNIP patch--]

OK, will add it later this evening. Thank you!

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +0/33 662376056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| --==< ^_^ >==-- `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
`------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'