Re: Unix-domain sockets - abstract addresses

["David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>]

   From: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>
   Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 12:59:53 +1000

   On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 21:35:05 -0500 (CDT), 
   Oliver Xymoron <oxymoron@waste.org> wrote:
   >Might it be simpler to change the overall module name? unix.o is an
   >especially poor choice of names, compiler defines aside.
   
   I prefer that option, expect that it changes the name of a module.  Not
   that we haven't done that before ...
   
   A module name of af_unix would be much better, like af_packet.  It
   would require changing the name of af_unix.c (source and conglomerate
   objects cannot have the same basename) and a change to modutils to map
   net-pf-1 to af_unix.

I don't like this solution, please fix this right and get rid of the
limitations at their source.

If I name a module "foo" and this causes "fo" to become a defined
CPP symbol in when compiling the sources for that module, that is
completely broken!

net/unix is just a trite example.  How about a driver for device "foo"
that has a member "foo" in one of it's structures?  They have to get
this undef thing too or rename their module, that's rediculious.