Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 19 May 2003 15:44:14 -0700 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: Recent changes to sysctl.h breaks glibc |
| |
Followup to: <20030519105152.GD8978@holomorphy.com> By author: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel >> IIRC you're supposed to use some sort of sanitized copy, not the things >> directly. IMHO the current state of affairs sucks as there is no >> standard set of ABI headers, but grabbing them right out of the kernel >> is definitely not the way to go.
On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 02:14:00PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > This "cure" sucks worse than the disease. Now you're putting it onto > everyone who maintains userspace to do the same repetitive task of > "sanitizing" this. Especially for things this trivial, this is a > ridiculous concept. > For 2.7, getting real exportable ABI headers is so bloody necessary > it's not even funny. However, for 2.5, breaking things randomly is > not the way to go.
I would rather have real exportable ABI headers, yes. We don't have them and AFAIK sanitized copies are the current policy.
-- wli - 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/
|  |