Would it then be (more) correct, or at least more acceptable, to add
'#ifndef __KERNEL__' or similar to the glibc header file?

How would that interact with the earlier statement from Aurelien Jarmo
earlier in the discussion that

> The definition of the structure ustat in sys/ustat.h is associated
> with the C function ustat() since glibc 2.0 and in HP-UX. You can't
> simply remove it and standard.


The core of the disagreement here seems to me to be the conflict between
the statements

> linux-libc-dev should not directly export a kernel structure. Either
> remove it or use #ifdef __KERNEL__, but don't bother us with that.


> it is no bug in the kernel to export its userspace interface.

I have not seen anyone respond directly to either of these, but any
solution acceptable to both sides will probably have to find some way to
resolve this first.

(For the record: I am assuming that other libcs will not necessarily
provide the same structure in the same place, because otherwise I cannot
see how your comment about glibc not being the only one provided by
Debian is at all relevant to the issue at hand.)

The Wanderer

Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org