After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 553099 - [patch] use sys/inotify.h instead of linux/inotify.h
[patch] use sys/inotify.h instead of linux/inotify.h
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 556196
Product: tracker
Classification: Core
Component: General
unspecified
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Jamie McCracken
Jamie McCracken
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2008-09-21 09:33 UTC by Adrian Bunk
Modified: 2009-05-13 13:12 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---

Attachments
patch to remove the obsolete linux/inotify.h code (8.95 KB, patch)
2008-09-21 09:34 UTC, Adrian Bunk 		none Details | Review

Description Adrian Bunk 2008-09-21 09:33:27 UTC 
Please describe the problem:
Tracker preferred linux/inotify.h over sys/inotify.h.

Combining #include <linux/inotify.h> with glibc headers is not
recommended and likely to break with kernel headers >= 2.6.27.

The way documented in the manpage, that works with non-ancient
glibc versions and most other Linux libc implementations, is to
use #include <sys/inotify.h> instead.

A general discussion of this topic can be found in the thread
starting with http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/9/16/79 .


Steps to reproduce:


Actual results:


Expected results:


Does this happen every time?


Other information:
Comment 1 Adrian Bunk 2008-09-21 09:34:39 UTC 
Created attachment 119077 [details] [review]
patch to remove the obsolete linux/inotify.h code
Comment 2 Jürg Billeter 2009-05-13 13:12:58 UTC 
Thanks for taking the time to report this bug.
This particular bug has already been reported into our bug tracking system, but we are happy to tell you that the problem has already been fixed. It should be solved in the next software version. You may want to check for a software upgrade.


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 556196 ***