[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:0.061 / U:2.328 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site