Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 6)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Citerar Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>:

> On Wednesday 26 July 2006 22:28, [email protected] wrote:
> > Have not found any (real) reason letting the cpp know about false/true. As
> I
> > said in the last version, the only reason seem to be for the userspace.
> Well, as
> > there is no program of my knowlage that needs it, they were removed.
> > 
> If we don't expect this to show up in the ABI (which I hope is true), then
> the definition should probably be inside of #ifdef __KERNEL__. Right
> now, it's inside of (!__KERNEL_STRICT_NAMES), which is not exactly the
> same.


What do you think about this?:

diff --git a/include/linux/types.h b/include/linux/types.h
index 3f23566..406d4ae 100644
--- a/include/linux/types.h
+++ b/include/linux/types.h
@@ -33,6 +33,8 @@ typedef __kernel_clockid_t	clockid_t;
 typedef __kernel_mqd_t		mqd_t;
 #ifdef __KERNEL__
+typedef _Bool			bool;
 typedef __kernel_uid32_t	uid_t;
 typedef __kernel_gid32_t	gid_t;
 typedef __kernel_uid16_t        uid16_t;

> 	Arnd <><


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux