Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Solaris 2.6 and Linux | From | Andi Kleen <> | Date | 26 Sep 1997 18:39:17 +0200 |
| |
Darren Reed <darrenr@cyber.com.au> writes:
> > Regarding the /usr/include/* differences - > > I hope you don't want to introduce mbufs in Linux ;) glibc goes further > > into the Single Unix compliance direction, but even libc5 isn't that bad. > > I usually find all the BSD extensions much more annyoing during ports. > > Heck, I'd settle for a *sane* /usr/include/netinet and /usr/include/net > on Linux without the mbuf's. It is possible but it'd mean using BSD > include files/header styles (which is too much to expect of a lot of > Linux die-hards here). Everything is different and different to every > other Unix (who all inherited these files at least, from BSD). How > completely fucked is that ?
glibc/libc6 based systems have this when you compile with -D__BSD_SOURCE. With libc5 it's -I/usr/include/bsd -lbsd (and possible -D__BSD_SOURCE too). Isn't this a FAQ?
Personally I like the Linux IP includes more, because they seem to never been influenced by a "8 character max symbol length" and prehistoric compilers that don't keep the struct member name spaces separate. YMMV.
-A.
| |