[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Linux v2.6.16
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> > >
> > > strace should be using sanitized versions of the kernel headers, not directly
> > > including them verbatim...
> > >
> > Now, would not it be good for everyone if the in-kernel headers get
> > every bit of sanitation?
> Yes, we should strive for fairly sanitized headers. That said, Jeff is
> also right - people really generally shouldn't use the kernel headers
> directly.

It appears this message hasn't spread wide enough yet. When reporting an
inotify-related build failure, I heard back from the GNOMES I shouldn't
be using outdated glibc headers but kernel headers instead... apparently
there's more need for discussion.

(Not that I'd find gamin particularly sensible, since it's undocumented,
and attracted WAY too much attention because of its flaws like SIGSEGV
in applications, 100% CPU loops and other shortcomings not only in Linux
environments, but also on FreeBSD.)

Matthias Andree
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-03-20 23:55    [W:0.083 / U:0.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site