This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and<linux/in6.h>
- From: David Miller <davem at davemloft dot net>
- To: carlos at systemhalted dot org
- Cc: bhutchings at solarflare dot com, yoshfuji at linux-ipv6 dot org, amwang at redhat dot com,tmb at mageia dot org, eblake at redhat dot com, netdev at vger dot kernel dot org,linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org, libvirt-list at redhat dot com, tgraf at suug dot ch,libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, schwab at suse dot de
- Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:05:12 -0500 (EST)
- Subject: Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and<linux/in6.h>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org><email@example.com><50F75AD7.firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Carlos O'Donell <email@example.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:58:47 -0500
> So I just went down the rabbit hole, and the further I get the
> closer I get to having two exact copies of the same definitions
> in both glibc and the kernel and using whichever one was included
> Is anyone opposed to that kind of solution?
Sounds interesting, please share :-)