lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Dec]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: <fcntl.h> vs <asm/fcntl.h> - total mess.
On Wed, 23 Dec 1998, Tigran Aivazian wrote:

> Hello guys,
>
> I would be glad to hear someone correcting me but as I see it - the
> situation is a complete mess. The O_xxx flags for open(2) are duplicated in
> the glibc2's <fcntl.h> and the kernel's <linux/fcntl.h> (or <asm/fcntl.h>
> the same). So, if I now implement O_NOFOLLOW or O_NONAME as an enhancement to
> open(2) it is not immediately visible to user space. And if I force user
> app to #include <asm/fcntl.h> then it will lose other important things,
> like R_OK, W_OK etc, which are in <fcntl.h> (well <fcntlbits.h> actually)
> but not in <linux/fcntl.h>. And I won't get declaration of open(2) that
> way.
>
> Why are not glibc2 maintainers include <asm/fcntl.h> from <fcntlbits.h>,
> just like <resourcebits.h> includes <asm/resource.h> or <socketbits.h>
> includes <asm/socket.h>?
>
> What is wrong with asking glibc2 maintainers for /usr/include/fcntlbits.h
> to include <asm/fcntl.h>? (and then sorting out all the conflicts like
> FASYNC and flock redefinitions, of course).
>
> Regards,
> Tigran A. Aivazian, http://www.aivazian.demon.co.uk/

While they do it, it would be real nice if they fixed the umount()
definition that now takes 2 parameters instead of the 1 that glibc
shows.


Cheers,
Dick Johnson
***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED *****
Penguin : Linux version 2.1.131 on an i686 machine (400.59 BogoMips).
Warning : It's hard to remain at the trailing edge of technology.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:46    [W:0.367 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site