Re: epoll exposure

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost> writes:

>> The problem is third-party software assumes epoll == Linux,
>
> Software that makes stupid assumptions will never go away.
>
> Is it better to work around it (not ship epoll.h), or to get it fixed
> (report it upstream as the bug it is)?  I could argue that either way.

I don't really see it as a bug.  You'd have to have all those problems
have configure logic that says

  if we find an epoll implementation, then we have a list of operating
  systems that have implemented an epoll that has different semantics
  and we have to reject it

It seems far more reasonable to say that if an OS implements a different
epoll, then it should call it something else.