[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0802201122150.26109@fbirervta.pbzchgretzou.qr>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:24:50 +0100 (CET)
From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, varekova@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [NETFILTER]: Introduce nf_inet_address
On Feb 19 2008 15:45, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>
>> It's in busybox 1.9.1. Just including <netinet/in.h> seems to be
>> sufficient to make it happy again. I wonder if netfilter.h should
>> include that for itself?
>
> That would break iptables compilation, which already includes
> linux/in.h in some files. I guess the best fix for now is to
> include netinet/in.h in busybox and long-term clean this up
> properly.
>
If <linux/netfilter.h> includes <linux/in.h>, userspace compilation
fails (clashing defs, etc.); if <linux/netfilter.h> includes
<netinet/in.h>, kernel compilation fails (file not found).
What comes to mind is the ugly hack we had for a few days:
#ifdef __KERNEL__
# include <linux/in.h>
#else
# include <netinet/in.h>
#endif
and I think we should not impose any inclusion rules on userspace
this way.
Right now, it is solved this way:
kernel .c files explicitly include <linux/in.h> when loading
<linux/netfilter.h>,
userspace .c files explicitly includ <netinet/in.h> when loading
<linux/netfilter.h>. And that seems to work out.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists