Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 15:59:14 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Subject: Re: namespace pollution with struct thread? Message-ID: <20011114154741.T8595-100000@delplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <xzp7ksut484.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 14 Nov 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > One other thing worth pointing out is that there is no reason for > <sys/user.h> to include <sys/proc.h>. It just needs to declare struct > proc as an opaque structure. I tried removing it a moth or two ago, but gave up. There was too much secondary namespace pollution that should be cleaned up first. > Also, <sys/user.h> currently pulls in a > lot of other headers such as <sys/_lock.h> and <sys/_mutex.h> that are > needed only because <sys/proc.h> depends on them. These are needed for <sys/ucred.h> too (except <sys/ucred.h> includes them itself). The struct mtx in <sys/ucred.h> is one of the main sources of secondary pollution. struct ucred insn't inside the _KERNEL ifdef because a few parts of userland still need it. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011114154741.T8595-100000>