* David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-06 14:07 > On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 14:59 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote: > > Are you suggesting that the kernel has to keep macros around which > > are of no use to the kernel itself just because glibc uses them? > > No, although in fact that _is_ the only reason we use these horrid __uXX > types rather than proper C datatypes, isn't it?
Alright, so we agree that there must be a possibility of getting rid of deprecated crap which leads to interface abusage. Fixing things is as simple as #ifndef IFA_MAX respectively IFLA_RTA in some compat header. > I'm suggesting that if you want to change things around as you did, you > should make sure the users of those headers adapt to cope. You did fix > the in-kernel users; you neglected to fix glibc -- and as far as I can > tell you didn't even bother to _warn_ glibc folks. I didn't warn them because I didn't know better. I was under the impression that glibc still maintains their own set of headers and will fix this automatically when they look at the diff. That's what I do for my userspace applications that use kernel headers. Ideally install_headers would do the trick but it often fails f.e. when some application which uses bsd features thus including net/if.h also wants to use new linux features and includes linux/if.h which then conflicts. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
