On Wednesday 16 January 2013 13:59:59 David Miller wrote: > From: Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> > > if you're not calling the kernel directly, why are you including the > > kernel headers ? what is the problem people are actually trying to > > address here (and no, "i want to include both headers" is not the > > answer) ? > > When GLIBC doesn't provide it's own definition of some networking > macros or interfaces that the kernel provides, people include the > kernel header.
sounds like glibc's headers are out of date and we should update them to include the missing definitions but this is still too vague. what headers/definitions do people want to see simultaneously included ? changes would be needed on both sides (kernel & C library). > This has been done for decades, wake up. and it's been broken for just as long. no need to be a dick. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
