At Fri, 31 May 2002 11:28:47 +0900 (JST),
Atsushi Nemoto wrote:
> takeshi_aihana> Is there any inconsistents on those conditions?
> AFAIK, Yes. For example, look struct ipc_perm in bits/ipc.h and
> struct ipc64_perm in asm-mips/ipcbuf.h (not struct ipc_perm in
> linux/ipc.h which is obsolete).
I did to check both bits/shm.h (glibc-2.2.3), bits/shm.h (glibc-2.2.4) and
for calling shmctl();
There are any differences 'struct shmid_ds' between glibc-2.2.3 and 2.2.4 that
However, I do not think those diffs are caused this problem.
Because the 'shm_segsz` which a member of this will be allocated on same
location even if the follows members
behind 'shm_segsz' are changed; i.e. it will have same value as 'shm_segsz' on
both different structure.
Is this right?
> If you can. Please do not forget rebuilding all applications which
> including these headers. If you want to stay in 2.2.3, you will have
> to modify your kernel headers according to the libc headers.
I understood. It might to solve this problem as the most simple way.
Thank you for your advice.
(TAKESHI - MontaVista Software)