Re: [PATCH] tools/nolibc: Add Linux specific waitpid() flags

[Mark Brown]

On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 11:13:38AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 11:00:20AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh  wrote:
> > Oct 20, 2023 23:57:01 Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>:

> > > Linux defines a few custom flags for waitpid(), make them available to
> > > nolibc based programs.

> > Wouldn't it be easier to include linux/wait.h instead?

> That's indeed the trend we should follow whenever possible. We've got
> caught a few times in the past with build errors depending on the
> includes ordering due to such redefinitions. I don't know if that's the
> case for these ones (nor if including linux/wait.h would cause other
> breakage) but it's worth considering at least.

> The difficulty here is that originally nolibc did not *explicitly* depend
> on UAPI headers, and was supposed to be self-sufficient (that was the
> main point). Adapting to multiple archs caused the addition of ifdefs
> all around, then trying to standardize the include file names instead
> of just "nolibc.h" caused conflicts with programs already including
> linux/anything.h. Anyway now we depend on linux/lots-of-stuff so I
> think it's worth continuing in that direction so that we don't replicate
> the UAPI maintenance effort.

OK, I'll do that - I'd not noticed that nolibc had started pulling in
linux/ headers so was trying to maintain the deliberate duplication.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature