On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 03:52:42PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > David Miller wrote: > >>> > >>However, it would be better if the ABI constants were exported, or at > >>least *exportable* (using a __KERNEL_XATTR_MACROS test macro or > >>something like that.) > > > >This is the same situation as the socket.h issue we're trying > >to figure out what to do about. > > > >wrt. the socket.h case I think I'm going to revert the guilty > >changeset for now until a better scheme is implemented > > Indeed it is (as well as <linux/stat.h>). > > I believe the use of feature macros is probably the way to go; that way > userspace can request subsets, which can vary from libc to libc. > > There is, of course, the "ABI language" variant, but I don't see that > happening unless someone has a lot of time to spend on it.
What's the problem of exposing all these APIs unconditionally? glibcs should either use all information from the linux/ headers or nothing at all, but not depend on hiding some bits. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
