Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263199AbTESWnf (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2003 18:43:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263187AbTESWnf (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2003 18:43:35 -0400 Received: from holomorphy.com ([66.224.33.161]:44521 "EHLO holomorphy") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263199AbTESWnc (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2003 18:43:32 -0400 Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 15:56:02 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Recent changes to sysctl.h breaks glibc Message-ID: <20030519225602.GH8978@holomorphy.com> Mail-Followup-To: William Lee Irwin III , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1053289316.10127.41.camel@nosferatu.lan> <20030519063813.A30004@infradead.org> <1053341023.9152.64.camel@workshop.saharact.lan> <20030519105152.GD8978@holomorphy.com> <20030519224414.GG8978@holomorphy.com> <3EC95EA9.9060504@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3EC95EA9.9060504@zytor.com> Organization: The Domain of Holomorphy User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1307 Lines: 28 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. William Lee Irwin III wrote: >> I would rather have real exportable ABI headers, yes. We don't have >> them and AFAIK sanitized copies are the current policy. On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 03:46:01PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Unfortunately "the current policy" is unrealistic, and repeating it > doesn't make it any less so. No contest there; unfortunately unrealistic amounts of work seem to be required to get around the general state of affairs at times. =( Does it really have to be 2.7? It seems most of this would be header reorganization with no runtime impact on the kernel. -- 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/