This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 09 May 2016 08:02, Eric Neblock wrote: > On 05/09/2016 07:53 AM, Zack Weinberg wrote: > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Eric Neblock <ceneblock@member.fsf.org> wrote: > >> On 05/09/2016 07:47 AM, Zack Weinberg wrote: > >>> Rather than this approach, why not have the glibc header include the > >>> uapi header and rely on its definitions? This might need to be > >>> conditional on a sufficiently new version of the uapi header being > >>> available, but it is more future-proof. > >> > >> My only concern with that would be if someone is compiling for BSD, > >> Solaris, Cygwin, or some other *nix. > > > > In that case, sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/bits/fcntl-linux.h will not be > > used at all. > > Just for my own sanity, I rechecked the INSTALL file of glibc and Linux > headers are required. well, they're required if you're building for a Linux target. they aren't needed if you build for non-Linux targets. -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |