linux-kernel - Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20130116.135959.90676245194307972.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 16 Jan 2013 13:59:59 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	vapier@...too.org
Cc:	bhutchings@...arflare.com, libc-alpha@...rceware.org,
	yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, amwang@...hat.com, tmb@...eia.org,
	eblake@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, libvirt-list@...hat.com,
	tgraf@...g.ch, schwab@...e.de, carlos@...temhalted.org
Subject: Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and
 <linux/in6.h>

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:28:39 -0500

> if you're not calling the kernel directly, why are you including the kernel 
> headers ?  what is the problem people are actually trying to address here (and 
> no, "i want to include both headers" is not the answer) ?

When GLIBC doesn't provide it's own definition of some networking
macros or interfaces that the kernel provides, people include the
kernel header.

This has been done for decades, wake up.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/