Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263257AbTESWJf (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2003 18:09:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263264AbTESWJf (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2003 18:09:35 -0400 Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:28513 "EHLO frodo.biederman.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263257AbTESWJc (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2003 18:09:32 -0400 To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Recent changes to sysctl.h breaks glibc References: <20030519165623.GA983@mars.ravnborg.org> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: 19 May 2003 16:18:39 -0600 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1687 Lines: 37 "H. Peter Anvin" writes: > Followup to: > By author: Linus Torvalds > In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > > > A number of headers have historical baggage, mainly to support the > > old libc5 habits, and because removing the ifdef's is something that > > nobody has felt was worth the pain. > > > > I think the only header file that should be considered truly exported is > > something like "asm/posix_types.h". For the others, we'll add __KERNEL__ > > protection on demand if the glibc guys can give good arguments that it > > helps them do the "copy-and-cleanup" phase. > > > > Copy and cleanup isn't realistic either, though, because it doesn't > track ABI changes. ABI changes or ABI additions? If the ABI is not fixed that is a bug. Admittedly some interfaces in the development kernel are still under development and so have not stabilized on an ABI but that is a different issue. > ABI headers is the only realistic solution. We > can't realistically get real ABI headers for 2.5, so please don't just > break things randomly until then. As the ABI remains fixed I remain unconvinced. Multiple implementations against the same ABI should be possible. The real question which is the more scalable way to do the code. What I find truly puzzling is that after years glibc still needs kernel headers at all. Eric - 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/