From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carlos O'Donell Subject: Re: Continuing the UAPI split Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 13:05:19 -0500 Message-ID: <086ffddf-553f-453d-a046-4d5e6abead21@redhat.com> References: <0B17C6F2-DC2B-4192-B4AD-BD11D6B9F2B6@ubuntu.com> <87zhh7j38y.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: To: Szabolcs Nagy , Elichai Turkel , Florian Weimer Cc: nd , Christian Brauner , "linux-api@vger.kernel.org" , libc-alpha List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On 11/7/19 11:21 AM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: >> Or just giving up and telling users they can't just directly include >> both libc headers and kernel headers? > > including both libc and linux headers is fragile and > will break differently across the different linux > libc implementations. We saw this all the time working in embedded. There ends up being a rather tight version coupling that happens, and that's unfortunate, but a function of cost. Fixing this so it works in the various cases is costly. -- Cheers, Carlos.