[Buildroot] [PATCH] Raspberry Pi - WiringPi Library Package

[Guillermo A. Amaral <g@maral.me>]

On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 09:04:19AM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote:
> Hi Guillermo,
> 
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:00:08PM -0700, Guillermo A. Amaral wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 08:33:59AM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 10:19:20PM -0700, Guillermo A. Amaral wrote:
> > > > From: "Guillermo A. Amaral" <g@maral.me>
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Guillermo A. Amaral <g@maral.me>
> > > > ---
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > > ++#ifndef O_CLOEXEC
> > > > ++#define O_CLOEXEC 0
> > > 
> > > Are you sure? I see
> > > 
> > > #define O_CLOEXEC      02000000
> > > 
> > > in include/uapi/asm-generic/fcntl.h.
> > > 
> > 
> > Hi baruch,
> > 
> > Usage of O_CLOEXEC in wiringPi was added very recently, it started failing
> > after that. I hear it still works if you're using glibc though (I haven't
> > tested it).
> > 
> > Here's the output if you remove the patch:
> > 
> > 	/development/test/build/wiringpi-02a3bd8d8f2ae5c873e63875a8faef5b627f9db6/wiringPi/wiringPi.c: In function ?wiringPiSetup?:
> > 	/development/test/build/wiringpi-02a3bd8d8f2ae5c873e63875a8faef5b627f9db6/wiringPi/wiringPi.c:1544:49: error: ?O_CLOEXEC? undeclared (first use in this function)
> > 	/development/test/build/wiringpi-02a3bd8d8f2ae5c873e63875a8faef5b627f9db6/wiringPi/wiringPi.c:1544:49: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> > 	make[2]: *** [wiringPi/CMakeFiles/wiringPi.dir/wiringPi.c.o] Error 1
> > 	make[1]: *** [wiringPi/CMakeFiles/wiringPi.dir/all] Error 2
> > 	make: *** [all] Error 2
> 
> I didn't say you should remove this patch, just use the correct value. Setting 
> O_CLOEXEC to 0 makes it effectively a no-op. Is this intended?

Sorry baruch,

I thought you where asking it if was required. -.-'

I searched around for alternative ways around the issue when I first
encountered it, it seemed no-oping it would be most portable/safest approach.

Since, if it's not defined, it might be for a reason, the outcome of setting
it to 02000000 would also be unknown.

G

-- 
gamaral http://about.me/gamaral