Messages in this thread | | | From | "Khimenko Victor" <> | Date | Sat, 10 Jul 1999 13:39:21 +0400 (MSD) | Subject | Re: [PATCH] 2.3.10 minix file.c |
| |
In <19990710040631.64357.qmail@hotmail.com> Frank Davis (fdavis112@hotmail.com) wrote: > Hello, > While compiling 2.3.10, I received a error message stating that > minix_sync_file was undefined. > The 'bmap' error also occured in inode.c (umsdos). > The following patches should address both issues.
> btw, in fat.o and other fs object files, update_vm_cache is undefined. Any > suggestions of resolving this?
I can only repeat my old letter:
-- cut -- In <377B9CFD.DE9293C5@lycosmail.com> Adam Schrotenboer (ajschrotenboer@lycosmail.com) wrote: > I have noticed that as of 2.3.6, there has been a FS subsystem reorg > with some name changes.
You do not need to be detective to spot this. *Dangerous* changes was announced quite loudly.
> Aparrently these changes have been applied to ext2, and probably the other > major FS as well. However, these changes have not been applied to the FAT > system.
Yes, and it was done deliberately.
> I have been trying to fix this, and have fixed it enough to make it > compile, but it does not link. The linker returns an error "undefined > reference to 'update_vm_cache'". My Q is "What is the function that has > replaced update_vm_cache()?"
Do not ask. If you think that just few functions was changed/renamed then you are not wrong. You are VERY wrong. Carefull review of FAT needed and not "try to make it work with big hammer". About question: vm_cache is not there at all anymore so there are no easy replacement for update_vm_cache function.
> Also, having replaced the call to generic_readpage w/ > block_read_full_page, it will compile, but I get a warning > "initialization from incompatible pointer type". This is probably not a > bit problem, but I would wonder if it can be fixed. I use > pgcc-1.1.3(2.91.66).
> BTW, I'm not on the list, so please cc any replies to me.
If you are not on list then you DEFINITELY must not try to fix it :-)) Yes, it's broken since filesystem in non-compileable state is by far better then filesystem with trash-full-your-disk feature built-in ... -- cut --
P.S. You should talk with "Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>" about changes in filesystems if you really feel yourself strong enough...
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |