From: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl>
To: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>,
akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Simple header cleanups
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 12:33:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3y7xosmbn.fsf@defiant.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BEF524DD-84E8-4579-ABFC-0AFB9EAC1982@mac.com> (Kyle Moffett's message of "Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:01:49 -0400")
Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com> writes:
> This is
> _exactly_ the way things work now, except there is no outside llh
> project, it's all stored in the kernel tree.
Precisely. I also think we don't have to worry about namespace
contamination and non-compliance to random "standards". It is the
userland _using_ the kernel headers at its discretion, we don't force
anyone to include anything. If something includes, say, kabi/hdlc.h
(just to make sure I know the details) then it has to be prepared
for hdlc_device struct to be defined, even if System 5 3/4 R 1.2.3.4
says nothing about it.
If glibc (as opposed to kernel utils) wants to use the kabi headers
(and I presume it should) then it has to build its own files based
on ours and/or should do other necessary steps to prevent namespace
problems (such as carefully picking files to include instead of
#include <kabi/*>). It will be easier than now anyway and I think
we're all open for suggestions.
If it turns out that we need a separate kabi/*.h file for every kernel
API structure or a set of #defines then let it be.
--
Krzysztof Halasa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-04-29 10:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-04-27 2:13 David Woodhouse
2006-04-27 2:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-27 2:27 ` Gerrit Huizenga
2006-04-27 2:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-27 3:00 ` David Woodhouse
2006-04-27 4:32 ` Gerrit Huizenga
2006-04-27 2:37 ` David Woodhouse
2006-04-27 2:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-27 3:17 ` David Woodhouse
2006-04-27 3:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-27 3:41 ` David Woodhouse
2006-04-27 7:10 ` Denis Vlasenko
2006-04-27 7:23 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-04-27 8:49 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2006-04-27 11:03 ` Arnd Bergmann
2006-04-27 21:37 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-04-27 22:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-27 23:11 ` David Woodhouse
2006-04-27 23:12 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-04-28 0:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-28 0:55 ` David Woodhouse
2006-04-28 15:32 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-04-28 15:37 ` David Woodhouse
2006-04-28 15:59 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-04-28 16:01 ` Kyle Moffett
2006-04-29 10:33 ` Krzysztof Halasa [this message]
2006-05-03 2:53 ` H. Peter Anvin
2006-04-30 9:38 ` Peter Chubb
2006-04-30 9:59 ` David Woodhouse
2006-04-30 21:48 ` Peter Chubb
2006-04-27 15:05 ` David Woodhouse
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3y7xosmbn.fsf@defiant.localdomain \
--to=khc@pm.waw.pl \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mrmacman_g4@mac.com \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®