[Top] [All Lists]

Re: iproute2 and 2.6.9 kernel headers (was Re: [ANNOUNCE] iproute2 2.6.9

To: David Vrabel <dvrabel@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: iproute2 and 2.6.9 kernel headers (was Re: [ANNOUNCE] iproute2 2.6.9-041019)
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:19:48 +0100
Cc: Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jeff Chua <jeffchua@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4176517C.4090504@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <41758014.4080502@xxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0410200805110.8475@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041020070017.GA19899@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041020094123.GF19899@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1098268885.3872.81.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4176517C.4090504@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 2004-10-20 at 12:52 +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> David Woodhouse wrote:
> > 
> > The time has come to fix it properly instead. Anything which these tools
> > actually need from the kernel headers should be moved into a separate
> > header file (still in the kernel source) which is usable from _both_
> > kernel and userspace.
> Isn't this what linux-libc-headers is for?

The separate linux-libc-headers is a hack, which will be able to die
once we properly clean up the kernel headers into those which are
'exported' and those which are private.

> > It should use standard types (like uint16_t etc)
> Why doesn't the kernel use these standard types also?

Archaic personal preference. Inside the kernel that's fair enough.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>