From: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 12:59:53 +1000
On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 21:35:05 -0500 (CDT),
Oliver Xymoron <oxymoron@waste.org> wrote:
>Might it be simpler to change the overall module name? unix.o is an
>especially poor choice of names, compiler defines aside.
I prefer that option, expect that it changes the name of a module. Not
that we haven't done that before ...
A module name of af_unix would be much better, like af_packet. It
would require changing the name of af_unix.c (source and conglomerate
objects cannot have the same basename) and a change to modutils to map
net-pf-1 to af_unix.
I don't like this solution, please fix this right and get rid of the
limitations at their source.
If I name a module "foo" and this causes "fo" to become a defined
CPP symbol in when compiling the sources for that module, that is
completely broken!
net/unix is just a trite example. How about a driver for device "foo"
that has a member "foo" in one of it's structures? They have to get
this undef thing too or rename their module, that's rediculious.
-
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 : Thu Aug 15 2002 - 22:00:26 EST