[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2019 12:13:37 +0100
From: "Daniel Kolesa" <daniel@...aforge.org>
To: "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, musl@...ts.openwall.com,
dalias@...c.org
Cc: AWilcox@...cox-Tech.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] uapi: Prevent redefinition of struct iphdr
On Thu, Dec 26, 2019, at 04:49, David Miller wrote:
> From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2019 20:05:15 -0500
>
> > On Wed, Dec 25, 2019 at 04:34:11PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> >> I find it really strange that this, therefore, only happens for musl
> >> and we haven't had thousands of reports of this conflict with glibc
> >> over the years.
> >
> > It's possible that there's software that's including just one of the
> > headers conditional on __GLIBC__, and including both otherwise, or
> > something like that. Arguably this should be considered unsupported
> > usage; there are plenty of headers where that doesn't work and
> > shouldn't be expected to.
>
> I don't buy that, this is waaaaaay too common a header to use.
In case of net-tools, only <linux/ip.h> is included, and never <netinet/ip.h> directly. Chances are in musl the indirect include tree happens to be different and conflicting, while in glibc it is not.
>
> Please investigate.
>
Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
