Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] linux-libc-headers 2.6.3.0 | From | Krzysztof Halasa <> | Date | Wed, 03 Mar 2004 17:49:28 +0100 |
| |
Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> writes:
> IIRC the current agreed scheme is something along the lines of this: > > abi/abi-linux/* Userspace relevant parts of include/linux > abi/abi-asm/ symlink to abi/abi-$(ARCH) > abi/abi-i386 i386 specific userland abi > abi/abi-ppc ppc ....
More efforts, no real effects. I don't think we need such an infrastructure. The normal headers should just be usable for user-space inclusion.
However I realize that the difference isn't that important, as long as we don't duplicate the definitions etc.
> So a header file in include/linux with a counterpart in abi could look > like this: > > include/linux/wait.h: > #include <abi-linux/wait.h> > > #include <linux/config.h> > typedef struct __wait_queue wait_queue_t; > ... > > > abi/abi-linux/wait.h: > #define WNOHANG 0x00000001 > #define WUNTRACED 0x00000002
why not:
include/linux/wait.h:
#define WNOHANG 0x00000001 #define WUNTRACED 0x00000002
#ifdef __KERNEL__
#include <linux/config.h> ...
#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
> But in the end the gain from a scheme like this outweights the drawbacks > - IMHO.
Such as? In comparison to a (fixed) present situation? -- Krzysztof Halasa, B*FH - 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/
| |