Serge Hallyn wrote (ao): > > Btw, the january patch gives the following output for an -mm patched > > kernel during compile. For example, linux kernel 2.6.1 with patches > > 2.6.2-rc2, 2.6.2-rc2-mm2 and the jail patch: > > > > /usr/src/linux-2.6.2-rc2-mm2/security/bsdjail.c: In function `proc_readdir_cp': > > /usr/src/linux-2.6.2-rc2-mm2/security/bsdjail.c:283: warning: implicit declaration of function `lock_kernel' > > /usr/src/linux-2.6.2-rc2-mm2/security/bsdjail.c:330: warning: implicit declaration of function `unlock_kernel' > > > > and > > > > WARNING: /lib/modules/2.6.2-rc2-mm2/kernel/security/bsdjail.ko needs unknown symbol unlock_kernel > > WARNING: /lib/modules/2.6.2-rc2-mm2/kernel/security/bsdjail.ko needs unknown symbol lock_kernel > > I've just applied 2.6.2-rc2 and 2.6.2-rc2-mm2 to a clean 2.6.1 kernel, > then applied the bsdjail patch, and did not get these errors. Are there > other patches you had applied? If not, please try starting with a clean > tree and patches. If it still does this, please send me your .config. > > I'm puzzled. /me too :-) I'll try again, but first I have to say that I always use a clean tree (which is read-only) because I use make O=.. to configure and compile the kernel. Do I use the right patch? I use jail2.diff. Here are the amount of rules and md5sum output: $ wc -l jail* 721 jail.diff 1067 jail2.diff $ md5sum jail* b3259ff81d28a905bfc13efe72863789 jail.diff 04404c693ac72656656b50c7112db3a3 jail2.diff Now I'll try again to see if something went wrong on my side. Btw, I compile the jail as a module. Maybe that makes a difference? -- Humilis IT Services and Solutions http://www.humilis.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Feb 04 2004 - 12:18:00 PST