[ANNOUNCE] linux-libc-headers 2.6.5.1

[ANNOUNCE] linux-libc-headers 2.6.5.1

[Mariusz Mazur]

Available at http://ep09.pld-linux.org/~mmazur/linux-libc-headers/
Changes:
- network headers got fixed - most notably removed most common collisions 
between glibc and llh (I hate making hacks, but don't have much choice - 
glibc's network headers lack functionality); iproute2 and iputils should 
build with just small patches (which can be found at the above url) and 
including linux/{in*,if*} in general should be quite safe now
- various fixes all over the place (eg. strace should build on x86-64)

Enjoy.


-- 
In the year eighty five ten
God is gonna shake his mighty head
He'll either say,
"I'm pleased where man has been"
Or tear it down, and start again

Re: [ANNOUNCE] linux-libc-headers 2.6.5.1

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 01:11:49AM +0200, Mariusz Mazur wrote:
> Available at http://ep09.pld-linux.org/~mmazur/linux-libc-headers/
> Changes:
> - network headers got fixed - most notably removed most common collisions 
> between glibc and llh (I hate making hacks, but don't have much choice - 
> glibc's network headers lack functionality); iproute2 and iputils should 
> build with just small patches (which can be found at the above url) and 
> including linux/{in*,if*} in general should be quite safe now

Maybe someone should spend some time and fix up the glibc headers instead? :)

Re: [ANNOUNCE] linux-libc-headers 2.6.5.1

[Kevin P. Fleming]

Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> Maybe someone should spend some time and fix up the glibc headers instead? :)

Mariusz' headers work really well; there are people building complete 
systems (X/KDE/GNOME/etc.) using them without any difficulties at this 
point.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] linux-libc-headers 2.6.5.1

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 12:24:55PM -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> Mariusz' headers work really well; there are people building complete 
> systems (X/KDE/GNOME/etc.) using them without any difficulties at this 
> point.

The thing is they're still conceptually wrong.  Glibc should provide working
and full-featured networking headers.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] linux-libc-headers 2.6.5.1

[Mariusz Mazur]

On pon 3. maja 2004 21:31, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 12:24:55PM -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> > Mariusz' headers work really well; there are people building complete
> > systems (X/KDE/GNOME/etc.) using them without any difficulties at this
> > point.
>
> The thing is they're still conceptually wrong.  Glibc should provide
> working and full-featured networking headers.

Or should have a mechanism for linux headers to provide them in a clean way 
(which is probably a better option since glibc will always lack behind linux' 
functionality). Either way it's not in my power to introduce the proper fix. 
Care to do The Right Thing (tm)? :)


-- 
In the year eighty five ten
God is gonna shake his mighty head
He'll either say,
"I'm pleased where man has been"
Or tear it down, and start again

Re: [ANNOUNCE] linux-libc-headers 2.6.5.1

[Rob Landley]

On Monday 03 May 2004 13:47, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 01:11:49AM +0200, Mariusz Mazur wrote:
> > Available at http://ep09.pld-linux.org/~mmazur/linux-libc-headers/
> > Changes:
> > - network headers got fixed - most notably removed most common collisions
> > between glibc and llh (I hate making hacks, but don't have much choice -
> > glibc's network headers lack functionality); iproute2 and iputils should
> > build with just small patches (which can be found at the above url) and
> > including linux/{in*,if*} in general should be quite safe now
>
> Maybe someone should spend some time and fix up the glibc headers instead?
> :)

So you think the uclibc users should be getting their headers from glibc then?

I don't.  I like this work, and intend to integrate it into some systems I'm 
putting together, after I get all the rest of the busybox bugs shaken out.  
(Well, not always bugs.  Lots of it's missing functionality.  I'm using 
busybox to replace coreutils, bzip2, findutils, grep, sed, tar, util-linux, 
and so on...  And then adding binutils and gcc and trying to compile software 
with the resultng system.  Yes, I am insane.  This is what's taking up all my 
spare hacking time these days...)

I'll replace glibc with uclibc (and the 2.4 headers with 2.6 headers) once 
I've finished with busybox.  (So far I've had to rewrite sed more or less 
from scratch, and revert to the non-busybox versions of sort, sh, awk, patch, 
ar, gzip, and gunzip.  But some of those are easy to fix, and the rest of 
busybox seems to be capable of being used as part of a development 
environment, even to the point of handling ./configure and make for the GNU 
tools they replace...)

Rob