On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 09:15:55AM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 08:43:47AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:33:53PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > This implements a minor cleanup of exported scsi headers, > > > and adds export of headers that are de-facto used by userspace. > > > The patches are on top of 2.6.32-rc1. > > > Can these be queued for 2.6.32? > > > Thanks. > > > > Before we do anything in this area we need to find an agreement who > > owns /usr/include/scsi/ . Right now that's glibc, and if we want to > > change it to the kernel headers we need to find a transition agreement > > with the glibc maintainer (aka mostly Uli). > > The scsi headers are exported. So it does not matter if glibc or any > other libc for that amtter uses the headers or not. > Exported headers has some rules to follow and scsi are no exception here. > > Now if we get the scsi headers in good shape then and only then we can > go to glibc people and tell them that we have a better set of scsi headers > than they have. > > Postponing updates to the exported scsi headers just beacause we do not > have any users of them at the moment is the wrong thing to do. > We should rather use the opportunity to streamline the exported headers > so we have a superior set of headers to offer. > > Sam Ulrich, does it create problems for you if we fix kernel headers for scsi? Does it make your life easier? -- MST -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
