Re: [Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>] libc/858: Missing ethertype.h and ETHERTYPE_* defines

[Philip Blundell <philb@gnu.org>]

>Should we add ETHERTYPE_DN, ETHERTYPE_ATALK and ETHERTYPE_AARP?
><net/ethernet.h> already includes <linux/if_ether.h> but neither
>defines those constants.  I couldn't find those constants on Solaris
>either.

I guess adding the extra constants doesn't do any harm. 

But if we do add them, we should stop pulling in the kernel header and do 
everything ourselves.  Otherwise we run the risk of getting multiple 
definitions if the kernel people add them later.

>This is not the first time I discover programs using this header file
>and define, so I think this should be fixed in glibc.

I don't agree that we should add ethertype.h.  Unless there is some standard 
that says this header should be present, people should probably just use <net/
ethernet.h> instead.

p.