Re: conflicting definitions in /usr/include/
Ian Zimmerman <itz@speakeasy.org> wrote:
>
> Never? What about, say, major.h? I understand that it should be
> avoided when possible, but expecting any reasonable definition to be
> picked up by libc in time seems too optimistic.
That's right, never. If you need stuff from major.h, you should
duplicate it in a local header file. If it goes out of sync, then
it is up to you to deal with it.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
Reply to: