From: Mariusz Mazur <mmazur@kernel.pl>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] linux-libc-headers 2.6.7.0
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 13:02:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200406241302.21617.mmazur@kernel.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <40DA9C6E.8050205@pobox.com>
On czwartek, 24 czerwca 2004 11:18, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Agreed... It's just getting 'down and dirty' and separating the ABI
> stuff from the non-ABI stuff. It's not necessarily difficult, just
> incredibly long and tedious, and potentially political.
One step at a time. It's quite simple to remove userland definitions from a
header and place them somewhere else (at least technically). Since kernel
headers are currently useless in userland anyway, nobody should care if they
get altered any more (yeah... right :). My plan is to take care of the
functionality covered by glibc first and start separating that stuff to some
abi dir (that is why I've requested more details). Once a patch for
separating header A gets merged and a new kernel gets released I'd simply
make llh use that abi header thus making llh a kind of compatibility layer -
apps could still include the old linux/ stuff while in fact using the new abi
headers. Nothing would get broken this way.
Once all glibc covered stuff got separated, glibc (and all other libcs for
that matter) would probably start using it (would they?), thus removing all
those bloody conflicts and making glibc always up to date.
Doable plan (at least in theory). The main question is - will those patches
get gradually merged into mainline? (Is there any possibility of getting a
yes/no answer from Linus?)
If not, the thing gets pointless, since maintaining such patches outside the
kernel would only need additional work, give no real benefit and accumulate
errors with time.
--
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-24 11:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-23 22:20 [ANNOUNCE] linux-libc-headers 2.6.7.0 Mariusz Mazur
2004-06-23 22:54 ` Chris Friesen
2004-06-23 23:02 ` Mariusz Mazur
2004-06-23 23:48 ` Chris Friesen
2004-06-24 5:58 ` Greg KH
2004-06-24 9:18 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-06-24 11:02 ` Mariusz Mazur [this message]
2004-06-24 13:53 ` Andries Brouwer
2004-06-24 19:29 ` Sam Ravnborg
2004-06-23 23:17 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-06-23 23:30 ` Mariusz Mazur
2004-06-24 16:43 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2004-06-25 9:25 ` Martin Waitz
2004-06-25 10:02 ` Andries Brouwer
2004-06-25 11:33 ` Rob Landley
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200406241302.21617.mmazur@kernel.pl \
--to=mmazur@kernel.pl \
--cc=cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox