On Sat, Oct 04, 2003 at 06:48:36PM +0000, Robert Millan wrote: > On Sat, Oct 04, 2003 at 06:16:47PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 04, 2003 at 06:05:13PM +0000, Robert Millan wrote: > > > I think we should disallow direct inclusion of <linux/*.h> in Glibc, any > > > comments? > > > > This is not an issue related to the Hurd at all. If you think that this > > should be done, for whatever reason, you need to talk to the glibc > > maintainers. > > I know. But this seriously affects portability to non-Linux-based systems, > which includes GNU/Hurd. > > I'm really sick of encountering programs that break because of arbitrarily > including <linux/*.h> stuff. Today I just recieved a patch for a program I > maintain that adds an #include on <linux/limits.h> just to get the PATH_MAX > macro. I'm going mad with this kind of stuff. > > If people really want Linux-specific features, let them define _USE_LINUX or > something like that.
That's all fine, I guess, but affects other systems beside GNU/Hurd just as well. If <linux/*.h> headers needs to be protected against inclusion must be decided by whoever provides these headers. This would be glibc in your case. Thanks, Marcus -- `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' GNU http://www.gnu.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marcus Brinkmann The Hurd http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de/ _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
