> > Ioctls were defined _without_ IOW macros. And that was ugly. That's why I
> > redifened them. So, if you recompile everything will be fine.
>
> So you break binary compatibilty within a _stable_ kernel release just
> for the sake of beauty ?
I rewrote a lot of driver code to support persistent device and device ownership. So, I thought it was a right time
to clean up interface as well. API was supposed to be cleaned up before 2.4.0 final.
> Besides, this does not only affect VTUND but also other applications like Hercules.
Yeah :(. Dave warned me about that. I agree that it's a bad thing. Sorry about that.
I promice that there will be no API changes in 2.4.x.
> Just recompiling Hercules doesn't help here anyway, because it (rightfully) refuses to include kernel
> headers but (due to the lack of net/if_tun.h within glibc) constructs the IOCTL command on its own.
Which imho is not a good idea.
> > > And BTW, you shouldn't include kernel headers from user space programs, should you.
> > That rule doesn't apply here.
>
> Can you tell me why it does not apply here? Just because you happen to
> be the author of both the driver (which is, without doubt, very
> valuable) and _one_ of several applications using it?
No. Just because glibc lacks a lot of if_*.h headers and if_tun.h is one of them.
Also it seems that there is no standard where if_*.h should go (include/netinet or in include/net).
On my RH 7.1 box if_ether.h is in netinet (which is imho wrong) and if_ppp.h is in net.
Max
--Maksim Krasnyanskiy Senior Kernel Engineer Qualcomm Incorporated
maxk@qualcomm.com http://bluez.sf.net http://vtun.sf.net - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 15 2001 - 21:00:19 EST