[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKpSnpLaavREwThY5e_wS+N62qQ9ueE1Km91k5OpPLqWJ8h-_A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 11:37:24 -0700
From: Jorge Almeida <jjalmeida@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Re: linux/vt.h
On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 03, 2015 at 06:01:30AM -0700, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 5:27 AM, vlse <vlse@...ra.biz> wrote:
>> > But then why do sabotage uses modified/adapted kernel headers.
>>
>> Good question. Conventional wisdom states that one must keep the
>> headers glibc was compiled against, not the headers of the current
>> kernel, but the why is never explained. Does it apply here (with
>> s/glibc/musl)?
>
> This does not apply whatsoever to musl since musl does not use kernel
> headers at all -- unless you want to count the few wrappers in sys/*.h
> which this thread is about, but musl is not actually "using" the
> kernel headers here, just helping applications that use the official
> <sys/*.h> includes find the kernel headers for their own use.
>
Thanks, clear enough.
Jorge
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
