Re: headers

[Randy.Dunlap]

On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 08:55:06 -0400 Rob Landley <rob@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

| On Monday 18 August 2003 21:45, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
| > Followup to:  <UTC200308181907.h7IJ7im12407.aeb@xxxxxxxxxxx>
| > By author:    Andries.Brouwer@xxxxxx
| > In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
| >
| > >     From garzik@xxxxxxx  Mon Aug 18 20:14:47 2003
| > >
| > >     I support include/abi, or some other directory that segregates
| > >     user<->kernel shared headers away from kernel-private headers.
| > >
| > >     I don't see how that would be auto-generated, though.  Only created
| > >     through lots of hard work :)
| > >
| > > Yes, unfortunately. I started doing some of this a few times,
| > > but it is an order of magnitude more work than one thinks at first.
| > > Already the number of include files is very large.
| > > And the fact that it is not just include/abi but involves the
| > > architecture doesn't make life simpler.
| > >
| > > No doubt we must first discuss a little bit, but not too much,
| > > the desired directory structure and naming.
| > > Then we must do 5% of the work, and come back to these issues.
| > >
| > > In case people actually want to do this, I can coordinate.
| > >
| > > In case people want to try just one file, do signal.h.
| >
| > Oh yes, this is a whole lot of work.
| 
| But is it 2.6 work, or 2.8 work?

I think that we are currently discussing it as 2.7 work.

--
~Randy
"Everything is relative."
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/