RFC: first stab at getting rid of libc_hidden_proto() forest

Daniel Jacobowitz drow at false.org
Mon Apr 14 03:13:11 UTC 2008

On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 06:05:18PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> Carmelo Amoroso wrote:
> > Anyway, being this a big change, I'd like to hear other opinions
> > and comment.
> > Mike, Jocke, Bernds, Peter others... what do you think ?
> I agree that the current method is borderline insane.
> Since we import libc-symbols.h from glibc - what do they do, and do we 
> have good a reason to be different?

There's a second header in include/ that uses #include_next.

An advantage of using a single header like vda suggested is that you
could use PCH for it...

Daniel Jacobowitz

More information about the uClibc mailing list