Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:53:34 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] Splitting kernel headers and deprecating __KERNEL__ |
| |
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > Same thing here. The __KERNEL__ approach says "whatever you want, boss". > > It doesn't get in the way. Maybe it doesn't actively _help_ you either, > > but you never have to fight any structure it imposes on you. > > Having to think before adding something that's user visible is a > _benefit_ not a disadvantage.
I've said this at least three times: if you can point to a _specific_ thing you want to move, go wild. I think the big waste in this discussion has been that there have _not_ been specific suggestions, just total sound-bites like "wouldn't it be great to move things to 'include/kapi'".
If you have a specific thing in mind, say instead something like
"Wouldn't it be great if we moved all the tty layer IOCTL numbers into 'tty-ioctl-nr.h', and made the old header file just include that header file, so that new libc users can get them from just that header? And btw, here's the patch."
then I might listen. Notice how the only really constructive thing to come out of this flame-fest has been a patch by Al that looked perfectly reasonable, but that got totally drowned out by the arguing?
Note that even _if_ you have a specific thing in mind, I want to see that somebody would say "yes, we'd use that organization". I would not be surprised at all if glibc people said that they can't really use any re-organization anyway, since they need to support old kernel setups too.
See? Changes that aren't specific enough, or don't actually help things is what I'm against.
Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |