[LTP] [COMMITTED] setsockopt08: includes netinet/in.h

[Petr Vorel]

> Hell Li,

> Li Wang <liwang@redhat.com> writes:

> >> > The conflict happened early in tst_test.h and I guess some header files
> >> > between line#14 to line#44 probably involves <linux/if.h>, but I'm not
> >> sure
> >> > which one is the culprit.
> >> Interesting, really something in in tst_test.h with combination of
> >> lapi/ip_tables.h. This combination is only in 2 tests, setsockopt0{3,8}.c,
> >> setsockopt03.c already had <netinet/in.h>.


> > I eventually caught that "tst_capability.h" is the key point.
> > To includes <netinet/in.h> before that can avoid the conflict.

> > But still not sure how it made things broken (i.e. where includes
> >  <linux/if.h>).


> >> > If we simply put the <netinet/in.h> at the top of tst_test.h, the
> >> > conflict disappears
> >> > as well.
> >> > See experiment commit:

> >> https://github.com/wangli5665/ltp/commit/0155df479811d9a51f30e09accb330238607f73d

> >> I'd be for adding it there, with comment why it's there. We can prevent
> >> problems
> >> with failing another test in the future. (+ remove it from both tests).


> > I'm OK with this fix.

> > @Cyril, @Richard, what do you think? any other thoughts?

> We need to clean up our headers, which is a bigger problem. Most tests
> do not need all the stuff in tst_test.h. It is just a load of unecessary
> work.

> Cleaning up the headers is a big challenge. It would be easier if we
> know what will break older distros. So I suggest adding something like:

> #ifdef _X_H
> # error "You should include X before Y ..."
> #endif
+1 for this.

> to one or more headers.

> Otherwise I'm fine with the above solution as a "temporary" fix.
quotation marks in "temporary" are correct, "temporary" means forever :).

Kind regards,
Petr