Bug 17561 - scripts/mod/sumversion.c:384: error: 'PATH_MAX' undeclared
Summary: scripts/mod/sumversion.c:384: error: 'PATH_MAX' undeclared
Status: RESOLVED WILL_NOT_FIX
Alias: None
Product: Other
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Configuration (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: P1 normal
Assignee: other_configuration@kernel-bugs.osdl.org
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-08-31 18:39 UTC by Martin Mokrejs
Modified: 2012-08-13 16:07 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Kernel Version: 2.6.19.7
Tree: Mainline
Regression: No


Attachments

Description Martin Mokrejs 2010-08-31 18:39:38 UTC
I need to compile some older linux kernel, and with 2.6.17 and 2.6.19.7 I had the following issue. I found it was known two years ago and here is the patch. Please fix the older kernel releases, at least in svn, maybe.

  HOSTCC  scripts/mod/sumversion.o
scripts/mod/sumversion.c: In function 'get_src_version':
scripts/mod/sumversion.c:384: error: 'PATH_MAX' undeclared (first use in this
function)
scripts/mod/sumversion.c:384: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported
only once
scripts/mod/sumversion.c:384: error: for each function it appears in.)
scripts/mod/sumversion.c:384: warning: unused variable 'filelist'
make[2]: *** [scripts/mod/sumversion.o] Error 1


Fixes:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/226169
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.xen.devel/51901

diff -r 557a4a0a5eac scripts/mod/sumversion.c
--- a/scripts/mod/sumversion.c  Fri May 30 19:08:50 2008 +0100
+++ b/scripts/mod/sumversion.c  Mon Jun 02 19:47:43 2008 +0900
@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
 #include <errno.h>
 #include <string.h>
 #include "modpost.h"
+#include <linux/limits.h>

 /*
  * Stolen form Cryptographic API.
Comment 1 Andrew Morton 2010-09-17 21:27:19 UTC
That file now includes <limits.h> so I'll assume the bug has been fixed.
Comment 2 Martin Mokrejs 2010-09-24 12:51:43 UTC
But would it be possible to release updates of the 2.6.17 and 2.6.19 branches?
In 2.6.20 there were some api changes and some drivers do not compile against them without code changes.

I see it is fixed in 2.6.23 while I haven't inspected .2[0-2].
Comment 3 Martin Mokrejs 2010-10-24 22:15:16 UTC
To summarize, I have this problem with 2.6.17, 2.6.18.8, 2.6.19.7, 2.6.20.21. I still haven't tried neither 2.6.20.x not 2.6.21.x series.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.