On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:09:16AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > We don't want to include kernel headers directly, as they we don't > > control their change, and they might create conflicts (especially with > > type definition). > > Thanks for explaining. It seems somewhat backward --- Linus is a > cooperative and reasonable person and has been careful in the past > about guarding definitions that should not be public with "#ifdef > __KERNEL__", and when there are mistakes it is possible for distros to > patch them away in linux-libc-dev packaging. > For example the types are not exactly the same in the linux kernel and the GNU libc, causing a lot of issues. This might be something we want to do in the future, but judging by the number of bug reports we get though the GNU libc doesn't include kernel headers directly, there is a huge work to do first.
Also when there is a conflict between the two headers, the kernel side and the GNU libc side have to decide which side should do the change. It usually doesn't work. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 [email protected] http://www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
