Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758230AbXKLKVV (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 05:21:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755130AbXKLKVO (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 05:21:14 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:49699 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753131AbXKLKVN (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 05:21:13 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Include header required for INT_MAX From: Peter Zijlstra To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Christoph Hellwig In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:21:10 +0100 Message-Id: <1194862870.7179.13.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1057 Lines: 23 On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 23:52 +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > >> Nack, we shoiuld never include userspace headers in kernel headers, > >> an even more never add !__KERNEL__ ifdefs. Just make sure your > >> programs include limit.h before including linux/cdrom.h. > > > >I think header files should be complete, and should not use undefined > >macros, picking up every random definition that may be in effect when > >the header is included, don't you agree? > > No, because I be damn sure that some developers try compiling programs > in non-linux environments (cygwin, solaris, andyourpersonaldistro, you > name it) which do not have to adhere to . It might use > instead, or whatever. > Hence, such extra includes are a nogo. Surely ISO-C99 has something to say on this subject? - 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/