Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu writes:
> On Mon, 19 May 2003 17:55:06 MDT, Eric W. Biederman said:
> > If things must be maintained in concert it is a bug.
> >
> > With a fixed ABI people take advantage of new features as they
> > care for them. And in general to use new features requires new code.
>
> And if the kernel headers aren't maintained in concert with the kernel,
> new userspace code can't reach the new features.
>
> Therefor, by your definition, the current situation is a bug.
Yes, glibc uses kernel headers.
> Try compiling code that uses futexes on a system that has a kernel that
> supports them, but kernel-headers that haven't been upgraded to mention them.
> The kernel has the new code, the userspace has the new code, but gcc will
> turn around and whinge about the new code because there's a piece missing in
> between. So people *CANT* take advantage of the new features (unless they
> do something silly like drag their own foo.h file around where it can get
> out of sync with reality).
Or the build against a library that does that. There are not that
many libraries.
For a lot of system calls it is actively dangerous to assume dev_t ==
__kernel_dev_t. As glibc does some cute things in there.
Eric
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 23 2003 - 22:00:38 EST