Re: Kernel includefile bug not fixed after a year :-(

[Sandy Harris <sandy@storm.ca>]

David S. Miller wrote:

>>... when did the kernel/user interface break, and how?
> 
> 
> I'll answer for him, about 20 or 30 times during IPSEC development.
> ...

Natural enough.

> But that's not the important issue, the important issue is that
> a huge number of kernel API interfaces have no equivalent in
> whatever you consider to be "user usable non-kernel headers".
> 
> Find me the API defines for the IPSEC configuration socket interfaces
> in a header file that you think users should be allowed to include.
> 
> You won't find it Jens,

That is, you and the other IPsec developers did not create it.
I wonder why not.

 From my rather naive perspective, I would think providing header
files for whatever interface you provide is part of the job. Of
course they'd have to be user-includable and documented at least
in man pages.

I suspect I am missing something here. What?

> and that's why it drives me nuts when people
> spit out the "no kernel headers" mantra.  Often it simply must be
> done as a matter of practicality.