Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 14:21:31 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: owl-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Error while compilinng Owl 3.0

Hi Keshav,

On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 08:48:08AM +0530, keshav peswani wrote:
> I started compiling Owl 3.0 kernel in qemu (native compiling) but i am
> still facing the same problem as before in cross compiling
> The error is : *include/ub/beancounter.h:139:1: error: expected
> identifier or '(' before 'struct'
> Also there arent any syntax errors in the above header file
> So if anyone has the above or any idea how to solve it , please do reply

Please re-read my previous response.  Yes, I did not address your
question directly, but that's because addressing it would not help our
project much.  This kernel version is not supposed to build for ARM,
and moreover we don't need it to build for ARM.  For the ARM port of
Owl, we primarily need to port the userland, whereas the kernel version
will change by the time this is possibly ready anyway (and it may even
be different in the ARM port specifically).

I could waste some time and likely address your question directly, and
we could even get past that specific compiler error - only to hit the
next one.  I expect that this kernel won't build for ARM for multiple
reasons, not just because of the above one error, and then it might not
run reliably and it will miss security fixes.  (I think RHEL5 is not
supported on ARM, so Red Hat has not been backporting ARM-specific
fixes to these kernels, which the OpenVZ kernel branch that we're using
in Owl 3.0 is based on.)

On the other hand, if you're getting errors when compiling the userland,
then those may be looked into - but please try compiling the entire
thing first ("make buildworld") and post some stats on how many packages
built fine and how many did not.  I understand that such errors may be
related to kernel headers too - if so, we will actually need to deal
with that (but not for compiling the kernel itself).

That said, I don't mind someone else in here addressing the specific
question.  I am just not wasting my own time on it.

Thanks,

Alexander

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ