Re: [Lksctp-developers] [RFC] RPM spec file for lksctp tools

[Sridhar S. <sr...@us...>]

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Francois-Xavier KOWALSKI wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I just wanted to raise again the only items left opened after the RPM
> disccussion: version declaration. What can I/we do to make things move
> forward on that topic?
>
> See below some inlined comments.
>
> La Monte H.P. Yarroll wrote:
>
> > [...]
> >
> >>>> AFAIK there is no such mechanism in place. Do you mean we should
> >>>> add in some place
> >>>>
> >>>> #define LKSCTP_MAJOR 0
> >>>> #define LKSCTP_MINOR 7
> >>>> #define LKSCTP_PATCHLEVEL 4
> >>>>
> >>>> Something different?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> That's roughly what I had in mind.  Should we duplicate the
> >>> KERNEL_VERSION()
> >>> macro to facilitate comparisons?
> >>>
> >>> #define LKSCTP_VERSION(a,b,c) (((a) << 16) + ((b) << 8) + (c))
> >>
> >>
> >> Looks good..It enable some test like
> >>
> >> #if LKSCTP_VERSION(LKSCTP_MAJOR,LKSCTP_MINOR,LKSCTP_PATCHLEVEL) <
> >> LKSCTP_VERSION(0,7,4)
> >>
> >
> > Would you mind cooking that into a small patch?
>
>
> Next round, after RPM submission, if Sridhar agrees.

Where do these #defines go? Will they go into a kernel sctp header file?
I am OK to wait for these changes to go in later.

Thanks
Sridhar