fail to compile "rounte" function
Rob Landley
rob at landley.net
Wed Nov 23 08:53:06 UTC 2005
On Wednesday 23 November 2005 01:46, stanliao at globalunichip.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> "route" is added into busybox. However, failure exists while
> compiling this functionality.
>
> The arm-linux-gcc version 2.95.3 is used for my linux kernel and
> busybox compilation. I let
> /usr/local/arm/2.95.3/arm-linux/include/linux --> (symbolic link)
> ..../"linux"/include/linux
> /usr/local/arm/2.95.3/arm-linux/include/asm -->
> .../"linux"/include/asm
> /usr/local/arm/2.95.3/arm-linux/sys-include/linux -->
> .../"linux"/include/linux
> /usr/local/arm/2.95.3/arm-linux/sys-include/asm -->
> .../"linux"/include/asm
>
> where "linux" is the root of linux kernel source tree.
From the attached msg, your first real problem is this bit:
/usr/local/arm/2.95.3/lib/gcc-lib/arm-linux/2.95.3/../../../../arm-linux/sys-include/linux/wait.h:4:
warning: `WNOHANG' redefined
/usr/local/arm/2.95.3/lib/gcc-lib/arm-linux/2.95.3/../../../../arm-linux/include/bits/waitflags.h:26:
warning: this is the location of the previous definition
Which means that your headers are fighting each other:
sys-include/linux/wait.h and include/bits/waitflags.h are redefining each
other's symbols, and neither one is part of busybox.
As soon as you see a big chain of "in file included from" things like that, it
almost guarantees that something's wrong with the standad headers. Either
we're #including the wrong stuff (unlikely if it builds for us, but always
possible), your header search path is screwed up, or your headers themselves
aren't happy.
I'm guessing #3 here. What's your environment? (glibc? uclibc? Using
maszur's kernel headers, or some other package? Kernel 2.6 or 2.4? Not
really a whole lot of information to work with here...)
Rob
More information about the busybox
mailing list