Re: signal.h conflicting with linux/signal.h (2.4.0)

[Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@ragingbull.com>]

On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Joseph A. Knapka wrote:

> Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Joseph A. Knapka wrote:
> > 
> > > There are probably exceptions to the rule above, for code that
> > > does very Linux-centric, non-portable tasks that are not supported
> > > by glibc.
> > 
> > Yes, I believe, this was the case - I used a 'non-standard' patch to the
> > kernel, so I needed to include those headers. What do I do in this case?
> 
> Well, I have never done it, but you could try #define __KERNEL__

This way you won't reduce conflicts - only possibly increase their
number:-)

> Another approach would be to re-define the kernel items
> that you need in your own headers, thereby avoiding dependency
> problems between kernel headers. And that way you get only
> exactly what you need; but on the other hand you have to
> maintain the definitions in your own code when the kernel
> definitions change.

Yeah, I thought about this as of a last resorte, pretty ugly though...

> Good luck,
Thanks!
Guennadi
___

Dr. Guennadi V. Liakhovetski
Department of Applied Mathematics
University of Sheffield, U.K.
email: G.Liakhovetski@sheffield.ac.uk


-
Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel.
Archive:       http://mail.nl.linux.org/
IRC Channel:   irc.openprojects.net / #kernelnewbies
Web Page:      http://www.kernelnewbies.org/