Re: [PATCH] libc/include/sys/tree.h: Re-add sys/tree.h

On Jul 17 11:15, Gedare Bloom wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 11:14 AM Sebastian Huber
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Again, I would simply remove <sys/tree.h> from libbsd, monitor the FreeBSD changes, and after evaluation update the Newlib version if there are benefits.
> >
> I'm not opposed to this route, but, we now wind up in the same problem
> in newlib: cygwin would like to update tree.h, but rtems would like to
> keep the rbtree version.

Cygwin does not use sys/tree.h internally.  We don't have any specific
need for a specific internal implementation of the API.  Therefore, we
don't really care which impementation is used.

The concern here is to remove a header which has potentially been used
by a Cygwin package, and as I mentioned in my reply to Joel, there *are*
packages out there using this file, for instance tmux.  While tmux still
works if sys/tree.h is suddenly gone, I have no idea if it still works
as before, or if you get user-visible changes due to that.  That's what
I'd like to avoid.

Yes, it might or might not have been a questionable decision to put
sys/tree.h into newlib, but now it's there and removing it could have
unwelcome side-effects outside RTEMS, that's all I'm saying.

So, let's update it and live with it and next time such a file is
supposed to be added, let's be a bit more thorough in discussing its
need.

In terms of updating the file, I completely trust Sebastian to do the
right thing.


Thanks,
Corinna