[lkml]   [2009]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [rfc] headers_check cleanups break the whole world
    Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > Well, the intention is to clean up the situation somewhat.
    > __KERNEL_STRICT_NAMES is a really old construct that has been
    > with us forever. It's not widely used ... i dont know how widely
    > it's being relied on. Sam, should we get rid of it, or should
    > user-space define __KERNEL_STRICT_NAMES in cases the glibc
    > definition collides with the kernel's definition?
    > Note that if user-space is "playing utterly stupid games", it
    > can cause trouble no matter what scheme we pick - so we have to
    > filter out the reasonable problems that we should and can fix in
    > the kernel.

    __KERNEL_STRICT_NAMES is an anachronism that was put in to not break
    libc5. It has long outlived its usefulness, together with all the other
    libc5 support crap in the kernel headers -- which do nothing but make
    the kernel headers useless for any sane purposes.

    Please let's just axe it.


    H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
    I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-02-25 08:07    [W:0.022 / U:2.876 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site