[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1358394046.3855.10.camel@cr0>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:40:46 +0800
From: Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, bhutchings@...arflare.com,
libc-alpha@...rceware.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, 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>
On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 14:22 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
> but this is still too vague. what headers/definitions do people want to see
> simultaneously included ? changes would be needed on both sides (kernel & C
> library).
>
Hi, Mike,
Please take a look at my first email in this thread. The user
application includes <linux/if_bridge.h> and <netinet/in.h>.
<linux/if_bridge.h> uses struct_in6 but doesn't include <linux/in6.h>
(this is my bad, sorry), an obvious fix is just including <linux/in6.h>.
But this immediately breaks applications which include
<linux/if_bridge.h> and <netinet/in.h>, just as what Thomas reported.
And if_bridge.h is kernel-specific, there is no corresponding glibc one,
so you can't blame applications which include both of them.
Thanks.
--
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