This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [danyd@fastrac.net.au] libc/846: struct ip_fw mismatch between netinet/ip_fw.h and linux/ip_fw.h


>>>>> Ulrich Drepper writes:

Ulrich> Philip Blundell <pb@nexus.co.uk> writes:
>> Agreed.  The ipfw program is probably about the only user and is presumably 
>> maintained by the same people who look after the kernel code.
>> 
>> I don't think we want to put a wrapper round setsockopt() just to make this 
>> work.

Ulrich> OK.  Could someone come up with a patch and a FAQ entry?

Ok, here's a possible solution:

Looking at the actual file, I'm in favor of removing <netinet/ip_fw.h> 
totally.  Nearly all structures and defines are different between
Linux 2.0 and Linux 2.1.

Here's a patch and a FAQ entry (the patch doesn't remove the file).

Andreas

1998-11-21  Andreas Jaeger  <aj@arthur.rhein-neckar.de>

	* sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/netinet/ip_fw.h: Removed.  There are too 
	many differences between the Linux 2.0 and 2.1 versions of this
	file and it's too difficult to convert all calls.  The file should 
	only be needed by the ipfw program which has to take care of the
	correct kernel version and include files.

	* sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/Dist: Remove netinet/ip_fw.h.
	* sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/Makefile (sysdep_headers): Likewise.


Index: FAQ.in
===================================================================
RCS file: /glibc/cvsfiles/libc/FAQ.in,v
retrieving revision 1.42
diff -u -r1.42 FAQ.in
--- FAQ.in	1998/11/20 17:20:37	1.42
+++ FAQ.in	1998/11/21 21:39:26
@@ -1094,6 +1094,14 @@
 when thinking about it.  The standards describing the System V IPC functions
 define it this way and therefore programs must be adopted.
 
+??	Why has <netinet/ip_fw.h> disappeared?
+
+{AJ} The corresponding Linux kernel data structures and constants are
+totally different in Linux 2.0 and Linux 2.1.  This situation has to be
+taken care in user programs using the firewall structures and therefore
+those programs (ipfw is AFAIK the only one) should deal with this problem
+themselves.
+
 
 ? Miscellaneous
 
Index: sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/Dist
===================================================================
RCS file: /glibc/cvsfiles/libc/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/Dist,v
retrieving revision 1.62
diff -u -r1.62 Dist
--- sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/Dist	1998/11/12 18:05:36	1.62
+++ sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/Dist	1998/11/21 21:39:26
@@ -34,7 +34,6 @@
 netinet/if_tr.h
 netinet/igmp.h
 netinet/in_systm.h
-netinet/ip_fw.h
 netlink/netlink.h
 netpacket/packet.h
 netipx/ipx.h
Index: sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/Makefile
===================================================================
RCS file: /glibc/cvsfiles/libc/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.93
diff -u -r1.93 Makefile
--- sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/Makefile	1998/11/12 18:05:43	1.93
+++ sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/Makefile	1998/11/21 21:39:26
@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@
 endif
 
 ifeq ($(subdir),inet)
-sysdep_headers += sys/socketvar.h netinet/in_systm.h netinet/ip_fw.h \
+sysdep_headers += sys/socketvar.h netinet/in_systm.h \
 		  netinet/if_fddi.h netinet/if_tr.h netinet/igmp.h \
 		  netipx/ipx.h netash/ash.h netax25/ax25.h netatalk/at.h \
 		  netrom/netrom.h netpacket/packet.h netrose/rose.h \

-- 
 Andreas Jaeger   aj@arthur.rhein-neckar.de    jaeger@informatik.uni-kl.de
  for pgp-key finger ajaeger@aixd1.rhrk.uni-kl.de


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]