Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Mike Frysinger]

On Wednesday 16 January 2013 13:59:59 David Miller wrote:
> From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 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sounds like glibc's headers are out of date and we should update them to 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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.