On 27/09/2016 15:19, "Joe Stringer" wrote:
>On 8 June 2016 at 13:49, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 08/06/2016 13:30, "Ben Pfaff" wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 01:07:32PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
On Wed, Jun
On 8 June 2016 at 13:49, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> On 08/06/2016 13:30, "Ben Pfaff" wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 01:07:32PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 07:23:29PM -0700, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
>>> > linux/in.h
On 08/06/2016 13:30, "Ben Pfaff" wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 01:07:32PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 07:23:29PM -0700, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
>> > linux/in.h (from linux uapi headers) carries many of the same
>> > definitions as netinet/in.h (from
On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 01:07:32PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 07:23:29PM -0700, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
> > linux/in.h (from linux uapi headers) carries many of the same
> > definitions as netinet/in.h (from glibc).
> >
> > If linux/in.h is included after netinet/in.h,
On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 07:23:29PM -0700, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
> linux/in.h (from linux uapi headers) carries many of the same
> definitions as netinet/in.h (from glibc).
>
> If linux/in.h is included after netinet/in.h, conflicts are avoided in
> two ways:
>
> 1) linux/libc-compat.h
On 1 June 2016 at 19:23, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
> linux/in.h (from linux uapi headers) carries many of the same
> definitions as netinet/in.h (from glibc).
>
> If linux/in.h is included after netinet/in.h, conflicts are avoided in
> two ways:
>
> 1) linux/libc-compat.h