Re: Bug#220399: Glibc people please comment on correct fix
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 09:43:35PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > I'm going to CC: this to debian-glibc in hopes that someone there can
> > comment on whether linux/videodev.h is intended to be used from
> > userspace (in which case it's clearly their bug), and if not what the
> > replacement userspace header is.
>
> Everyone loses: it is not intended to be used from userspace, was in
> general never intended to be, and there is no replacement. However, at
> least for sarge, we are taking the pragmatic approach - we'll fix it to
> work from userspace (if any of the glibc maintainers ever find time
> again :().
>
> If you can provide a patch for the issue that would of course help. I
> thought I'd already fixed <linux/videodev.h>; I was able to build
> mplayer using it...
Hmm, I see, although I don't understand, as I thought it was well accepted
that the /usr/include/linux headers are used in userspace ...
why would someone have gone through the troubles of adopting them
during all of these years, if it would have been useless :)
The patch that I need is actually trivial:
as /linux/videodev.h includes linux/videodev2.h which in turn includes
linux/time.h, its inclusion creates a conflict with the proper time.h.
(As both time.h and linux/time.h declare the struct timeval)
One possibility is to change the linux/time.h into time.h in videodev2.h.
I am not sure if this is the best way to solve it though.
Another possibility would be to let time.h use linux/time.h, which would
avoid the redundant declaration of struct timeval.
.. or declaring struct timeval in videodev2.h directly without additional
includes ..
... aso
Being at it, the best thing to do would be to create a userspace header
for the videodev.h
Well, you see, several options, and I am not familiar enough with the
situation and its future development to judge which is the best.
Any guidance is appreciated,
Guenter
Reply to: