> > Regarding the /usr/include/* differences -
> > I hope you don't want to introduce mbufs in Linux ;) glibc goes further
> > into the Single Unix compliance direction, but even libc5 isn't that bad.
> > I usually find all the BSD extensions much more annyoing during ports.
>
> Heck, I'd settle for a *sane* /usr/include/netinet and /usr/include/net
> on Linux without the mbuf's. It is possible but it'd mean using BSD
> include files/header styles (which is too much to expect of a lot of
> Linux die-hards here). Everything is different and different to every
> other Unix (who all inherited these files at least, from BSD). How
> completely fucked is that ?
glibc/libc6 based systems have this when you compile with -D__BSD_SOURCE.
With libc5 it's -I/usr/include/bsd -lbsd (and possible -D__BSD_SOURCE too).
Isn't this a FAQ?
Personally I like the Linux IP includes more, because they seem to never
been influenced by a "8 character max symbol length" and prehistoric
compilers that don't keep the struct member name spaces separate. YMMV.
-A.