Why are there multiple copies of header files in /usr/include?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1












I've been browsing my /usr/include folder trying to get acquainted with the layout and I've noticed that there are multiple copies of header files (at least by name, I didn't actually diff them to see if they were exact copies) found in several sub directories of /usr/include. This is especially the case for standard C and C++ header files as well as POSIX/LSB standard header files.



Some examples include (note ./ refers to /usr/include):



./asm-generic/unistd.h
./linux/unistd.h
./unistd.h
./x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/unistd.h
./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/unistd.h
./x86_64-linux-gnu/asm/unistd.h

./stdlib.h
./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/stdlib.h
./c++/7/stdlib.h
./c++/7/tr1/stdlib.h

./c++/7/cmath
./c++/7/ext/cmath
./c++/7/tr1/cmath

./asm-generic/termios.h
./linux/termios.h
./x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/termios.h
./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/termios.h
./x86_64-linux-gnu/asm/termios.h
./termios.h

./linux/time.h
./time.h
./x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/time.h
./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/time.h


Why is this? And why do some C standard headers show up in C++ locations?



I only have one compiler installed (GCC 7).










share|improve this question

























    up vote
    4
    down vote

    favorite
    1












    I've been browsing my /usr/include folder trying to get acquainted with the layout and I've noticed that there are multiple copies of header files (at least by name, I didn't actually diff them to see if they were exact copies) found in several sub directories of /usr/include. This is especially the case for standard C and C++ header files as well as POSIX/LSB standard header files.



    Some examples include (note ./ refers to /usr/include):



    ./asm-generic/unistd.h
    ./linux/unistd.h
    ./unistd.h
    ./x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/unistd.h
    ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/unistd.h
    ./x86_64-linux-gnu/asm/unistd.h

    ./stdlib.h
    ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/stdlib.h
    ./c++/7/stdlib.h
    ./c++/7/tr1/stdlib.h

    ./c++/7/cmath
    ./c++/7/ext/cmath
    ./c++/7/tr1/cmath

    ./asm-generic/termios.h
    ./linux/termios.h
    ./x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/termios.h
    ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/termios.h
    ./x86_64-linux-gnu/asm/termios.h
    ./termios.h

    ./linux/time.h
    ./time.h
    ./x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/time.h
    ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/time.h


    Why is this? And why do some C standard headers show up in C++ locations?



    I only have one compiler installed (GCC 7).










    share|improve this question























      up vote
      4
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      4
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1





      I've been browsing my /usr/include folder trying to get acquainted with the layout and I've noticed that there are multiple copies of header files (at least by name, I didn't actually diff them to see if they were exact copies) found in several sub directories of /usr/include. This is especially the case for standard C and C++ header files as well as POSIX/LSB standard header files.



      Some examples include (note ./ refers to /usr/include):



      ./asm-generic/unistd.h
      ./linux/unistd.h
      ./unistd.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/unistd.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/unistd.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/asm/unistd.h

      ./stdlib.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/stdlib.h
      ./c++/7/stdlib.h
      ./c++/7/tr1/stdlib.h

      ./c++/7/cmath
      ./c++/7/ext/cmath
      ./c++/7/tr1/cmath

      ./asm-generic/termios.h
      ./linux/termios.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/termios.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/termios.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/asm/termios.h
      ./termios.h

      ./linux/time.h
      ./time.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/time.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/time.h


      Why is this? And why do some C standard headers show up in C++ locations?



      I only have one compiler installed (GCC 7).










      share|improve this question













      I've been browsing my /usr/include folder trying to get acquainted with the layout and I've noticed that there are multiple copies of header files (at least by name, I didn't actually diff them to see if they were exact copies) found in several sub directories of /usr/include. This is especially the case for standard C and C++ header files as well as POSIX/LSB standard header files.



      Some examples include (note ./ refers to /usr/include):



      ./asm-generic/unistd.h
      ./linux/unistd.h
      ./unistd.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/unistd.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/unistd.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/asm/unistd.h

      ./stdlib.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/stdlib.h
      ./c++/7/stdlib.h
      ./c++/7/tr1/stdlib.h

      ./c++/7/cmath
      ./c++/7/ext/cmath
      ./c++/7/tr1/cmath

      ./asm-generic/termios.h
      ./linux/termios.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/termios.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/termios.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/asm/termios.h
      ./termios.h

      ./linux/time.h
      ./time.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/time.h
      ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/time.h


      Why is this? And why do some C standard headers show up in C++ locations?



      I only have one compiler installed (GCC 7).







      c c++ linux-headers






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Nov 19 at 5:26









      Adam Sperry

      254




      254




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          3
          down vote



          accepted










          No, they aren't exact copies.



          If you care to investigate, you'll find that the files at the top level /usr/include will normally have a lot of #ifdefs or other conditionals, and they'll only define the architecture-independent parts and will #include other stuff from architecture-specific directories deeper within the hierarchy. As some architecture-specific parts may in turn depend on some architecture-independent parts, there may be multiple layers of inclusion on top of each other.



          Likewise, the files under /usr/include/c++ will have the additional declarations that will only make sense for C++, and #includes for the corresponding C include files where appropriate.



          The name of the game is deduplication for maintainability: the aim is that when a glibc developer needs to add something new that only affects the ABI between the application and glibc and has no architecture-specific parts, the addition ideally needs to happen at just one location in the tree of include files, and it will take effect for all hardware architectures that use glibc. Or, say, when a new system call is added to the Linux kernel, there will be a place to add it without interfering with *BSD or GNU Hurd system call definitions, for example. Or if you're porting glibc to yet another hardware/kernel architecture, you'll find places you can plug in the necessary kernel ABI definitions without disturbing architecture-independent stuff any more than absolutely necessary.



          Yes, it's pretty complicated.



          I don't have any easy references for you, since the entire /usr/include layout is a sum of ISO C and POSIX standards requirements and the choices made by both the GCC and glibc projects.



          I'd suggest you make a note of your architecture triplet (x86_64-linux-gnu in your case; obtainable with gcc -dumpmachine on any architecture supported by GCC) and then study the compiler's default #include <...> file search paths.



          You can see the search paths with:




          • cpp -v /dev/null -o /dev/null for plain C


          • cpp -x c++ -v /dev/null -o /dev/null for C++

          I don't have a system with GCC 7 at hand here, but for GCC 6, the list of include paths looks like this for C:



          ...
          #include <...> search starts here:
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include
          /usr/local/include
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include-fixed
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu
          /usr/include
          End of search list.
          ...


          ... and like this for C++:



          ...
          #include <...> search starts here:
          /usr/include/c++/6
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/c++/6
          /usr/include/c++/6/backward
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include
          /usr/local/include
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include-fixed
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu
          /usr/include
          End of search list.
          ...


          If the /usr/local/include/<architecture triplet> directory existed, it would get added in the lists, just before /usr/local/include.



          So, it would seem that for your own projects, if you need to have architecture-specific versions of an include file, you could put them under /usr/[local/]include/<architecture triplet>/, and the regular architecture-agnostic include files to /usr/[local/]include/. I wouldn't touch any include directories whose path name includes the major version number of the compiler without a very good reason.



          If you plan to modify glibc, and you cannot find what you need in the glibc developer documentation, you'd better ask for advice on the glibc development mailing list; glibc is extra complicated because it is usable also on architectures that use a compiler other than GCC, and so might not have the architecture triplet convention as standard.






          share|improve this answer






















          • Thank you! This was very informative. I would like to investigate further. Do you have any references I can look to for further information about the way /use/include is organized in order to achieve the goals you’ve described? I would like to know which regions of this tree are designated for the specific purposes you’ve mentioned.
            – Adam Sperry
            Nov 19 at 14:10











          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "106"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f482669%2fwhy-are-there-multiple-copies-of-header-files-in-usr-include%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          3
          down vote



          accepted










          No, they aren't exact copies.



          If you care to investigate, you'll find that the files at the top level /usr/include will normally have a lot of #ifdefs or other conditionals, and they'll only define the architecture-independent parts and will #include other stuff from architecture-specific directories deeper within the hierarchy. As some architecture-specific parts may in turn depend on some architecture-independent parts, there may be multiple layers of inclusion on top of each other.



          Likewise, the files under /usr/include/c++ will have the additional declarations that will only make sense for C++, and #includes for the corresponding C include files where appropriate.



          The name of the game is deduplication for maintainability: the aim is that when a glibc developer needs to add something new that only affects the ABI between the application and glibc and has no architecture-specific parts, the addition ideally needs to happen at just one location in the tree of include files, and it will take effect for all hardware architectures that use glibc. Or, say, when a new system call is added to the Linux kernel, there will be a place to add it without interfering with *BSD or GNU Hurd system call definitions, for example. Or if you're porting glibc to yet another hardware/kernel architecture, you'll find places you can plug in the necessary kernel ABI definitions without disturbing architecture-independent stuff any more than absolutely necessary.



          Yes, it's pretty complicated.



          I don't have any easy references for you, since the entire /usr/include layout is a sum of ISO C and POSIX standards requirements and the choices made by both the GCC and glibc projects.



          I'd suggest you make a note of your architecture triplet (x86_64-linux-gnu in your case; obtainable with gcc -dumpmachine on any architecture supported by GCC) and then study the compiler's default #include <...> file search paths.



          You can see the search paths with:




          • cpp -v /dev/null -o /dev/null for plain C


          • cpp -x c++ -v /dev/null -o /dev/null for C++

          I don't have a system with GCC 7 at hand here, but for GCC 6, the list of include paths looks like this for C:



          ...
          #include <...> search starts here:
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include
          /usr/local/include
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include-fixed
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu
          /usr/include
          End of search list.
          ...


          ... and like this for C++:



          ...
          #include <...> search starts here:
          /usr/include/c++/6
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/c++/6
          /usr/include/c++/6/backward
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include
          /usr/local/include
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include-fixed
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu
          /usr/include
          End of search list.
          ...


          If the /usr/local/include/<architecture triplet> directory existed, it would get added in the lists, just before /usr/local/include.



          So, it would seem that for your own projects, if you need to have architecture-specific versions of an include file, you could put them under /usr/[local/]include/<architecture triplet>/, and the regular architecture-agnostic include files to /usr/[local/]include/. I wouldn't touch any include directories whose path name includes the major version number of the compiler without a very good reason.



          If you plan to modify glibc, and you cannot find what you need in the glibc developer documentation, you'd better ask for advice on the glibc development mailing list; glibc is extra complicated because it is usable also on architectures that use a compiler other than GCC, and so might not have the architecture triplet convention as standard.






          share|improve this answer






















          • Thank you! This was very informative. I would like to investigate further. Do you have any references I can look to for further information about the way /use/include is organized in order to achieve the goals you’ve described? I would like to know which regions of this tree are designated for the specific purposes you’ve mentioned.
            – Adam Sperry
            Nov 19 at 14:10















          up vote
          3
          down vote



          accepted










          No, they aren't exact copies.



          If you care to investigate, you'll find that the files at the top level /usr/include will normally have a lot of #ifdefs or other conditionals, and they'll only define the architecture-independent parts and will #include other stuff from architecture-specific directories deeper within the hierarchy. As some architecture-specific parts may in turn depend on some architecture-independent parts, there may be multiple layers of inclusion on top of each other.



          Likewise, the files under /usr/include/c++ will have the additional declarations that will only make sense for C++, and #includes for the corresponding C include files where appropriate.



          The name of the game is deduplication for maintainability: the aim is that when a glibc developer needs to add something new that only affects the ABI between the application and glibc and has no architecture-specific parts, the addition ideally needs to happen at just one location in the tree of include files, and it will take effect for all hardware architectures that use glibc. Or, say, when a new system call is added to the Linux kernel, there will be a place to add it without interfering with *BSD or GNU Hurd system call definitions, for example. Or if you're porting glibc to yet another hardware/kernel architecture, you'll find places you can plug in the necessary kernel ABI definitions without disturbing architecture-independent stuff any more than absolutely necessary.



          Yes, it's pretty complicated.



          I don't have any easy references for you, since the entire /usr/include layout is a sum of ISO C and POSIX standards requirements and the choices made by both the GCC and glibc projects.



          I'd suggest you make a note of your architecture triplet (x86_64-linux-gnu in your case; obtainable with gcc -dumpmachine on any architecture supported by GCC) and then study the compiler's default #include <...> file search paths.



          You can see the search paths with:




          • cpp -v /dev/null -o /dev/null for plain C


          • cpp -x c++ -v /dev/null -o /dev/null for C++

          I don't have a system with GCC 7 at hand here, but for GCC 6, the list of include paths looks like this for C:



          ...
          #include <...> search starts here:
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include
          /usr/local/include
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include-fixed
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu
          /usr/include
          End of search list.
          ...


          ... and like this for C++:



          ...
          #include <...> search starts here:
          /usr/include/c++/6
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/c++/6
          /usr/include/c++/6/backward
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include
          /usr/local/include
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include-fixed
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu
          /usr/include
          End of search list.
          ...


          If the /usr/local/include/<architecture triplet> directory existed, it would get added in the lists, just before /usr/local/include.



          So, it would seem that for your own projects, if you need to have architecture-specific versions of an include file, you could put them under /usr/[local/]include/<architecture triplet>/, and the regular architecture-agnostic include files to /usr/[local/]include/. I wouldn't touch any include directories whose path name includes the major version number of the compiler without a very good reason.



          If you plan to modify glibc, and you cannot find what you need in the glibc developer documentation, you'd better ask for advice on the glibc development mailing list; glibc is extra complicated because it is usable also on architectures that use a compiler other than GCC, and so might not have the architecture triplet convention as standard.






          share|improve this answer






















          • Thank you! This was very informative. I would like to investigate further. Do you have any references I can look to for further information about the way /use/include is organized in order to achieve the goals you’ve described? I would like to know which regions of this tree are designated for the specific purposes you’ve mentioned.
            – Adam Sperry
            Nov 19 at 14:10













          up vote
          3
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          3
          down vote



          accepted






          No, they aren't exact copies.



          If you care to investigate, you'll find that the files at the top level /usr/include will normally have a lot of #ifdefs or other conditionals, and they'll only define the architecture-independent parts and will #include other stuff from architecture-specific directories deeper within the hierarchy. As some architecture-specific parts may in turn depend on some architecture-independent parts, there may be multiple layers of inclusion on top of each other.



          Likewise, the files under /usr/include/c++ will have the additional declarations that will only make sense for C++, and #includes for the corresponding C include files where appropriate.



          The name of the game is deduplication for maintainability: the aim is that when a glibc developer needs to add something new that only affects the ABI between the application and glibc and has no architecture-specific parts, the addition ideally needs to happen at just one location in the tree of include files, and it will take effect for all hardware architectures that use glibc. Or, say, when a new system call is added to the Linux kernel, there will be a place to add it without interfering with *BSD or GNU Hurd system call definitions, for example. Or if you're porting glibc to yet another hardware/kernel architecture, you'll find places you can plug in the necessary kernel ABI definitions without disturbing architecture-independent stuff any more than absolutely necessary.



          Yes, it's pretty complicated.



          I don't have any easy references for you, since the entire /usr/include layout is a sum of ISO C and POSIX standards requirements and the choices made by both the GCC and glibc projects.



          I'd suggest you make a note of your architecture triplet (x86_64-linux-gnu in your case; obtainable with gcc -dumpmachine on any architecture supported by GCC) and then study the compiler's default #include <...> file search paths.



          You can see the search paths with:




          • cpp -v /dev/null -o /dev/null for plain C


          • cpp -x c++ -v /dev/null -o /dev/null for C++

          I don't have a system with GCC 7 at hand here, but for GCC 6, the list of include paths looks like this for C:



          ...
          #include <...> search starts here:
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include
          /usr/local/include
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include-fixed
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu
          /usr/include
          End of search list.
          ...


          ... and like this for C++:



          ...
          #include <...> search starts here:
          /usr/include/c++/6
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/c++/6
          /usr/include/c++/6/backward
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include
          /usr/local/include
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include-fixed
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu
          /usr/include
          End of search list.
          ...


          If the /usr/local/include/<architecture triplet> directory existed, it would get added in the lists, just before /usr/local/include.



          So, it would seem that for your own projects, if you need to have architecture-specific versions of an include file, you could put them under /usr/[local/]include/<architecture triplet>/, and the regular architecture-agnostic include files to /usr/[local/]include/. I wouldn't touch any include directories whose path name includes the major version number of the compiler without a very good reason.



          If you plan to modify glibc, and you cannot find what you need in the glibc developer documentation, you'd better ask for advice on the glibc development mailing list; glibc is extra complicated because it is usable also on architectures that use a compiler other than GCC, and so might not have the architecture triplet convention as standard.






          share|improve this answer














          No, they aren't exact copies.



          If you care to investigate, you'll find that the files at the top level /usr/include will normally have a lot of #ifdefs or other conditionals, and they'll only define the architecture-independent parts and will #include other stuff from architecture-specific directories deeper within the hierarchy. As some architecture-specific parts may in turn depend on some architecture-independent parts, there may be multiple layers of inclusion on top of each other.



          Likewise, the files under /usr/include/c++ will have the additional declarations that will only make sense for C++, and #includes for the corresponding C include files where appropriate.



          The name of the game is deduplication for maintainability: the aim is that when a glibc developer needs to add something new that only affects the ABI between the application and glibc and has no architecture-specific parts, the addition ideally needs to happen at just one location in the tree of include files, and it will take effect for all hardware architectures that use glibc. Or, say, when a new system call is added to the Linux kernel, there will be a place to add it without interfering with *BSD or GNU Hurd system call definitions, for example. Or if you're porting glibc to yet another hardware/kernel architecture, you'll find places you can plug in the necessary kernel ABI definitions without disturbing architecture-independent stuff any more than absolutely necessary.



          Yes, it's pretty complicated.



          I don't have any easy references for you, since the entire /usr/include layout is a sum of ISO C and POSIX standards requirements and the choices made by both the GCC and glibc projects.



          I'd suggest you make a note of your architecture triplet (x86_64-linux-gnu in your case; obtainable with gcc -dumpmachine on any architecture supported by GCC) and then study the compiler's default #include <...> file search paths.



          You can see the search paths with:




          • cpp -v /dev/null -o /dev/null for plain C


          • cpp -x c++ -v /dev/null -o /dev/null for C++

          I don't have a system with GCC 7 at hand here, but for GCC 6, the list of include paths looks like this for C:



          ...
          #include <...> search starts here:
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include
          /usr/local/include
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include-fixed
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu
          /usr/include
          End of search list.
          ...


          ... and like this for C++:



          ...
          #include <...> search starts here:
          /usr/include/c++/6
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/c++/6
          /usr/include/c++/6/backward
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include
          /usr/local/include
          /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/include-fixed
          /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu
          /usr/include
          End of search list.
          ...


          If the /usr/local/include/<architecture triplet> directory existed, it would get added in the lists, just before /usr/local/include.



          So, it would seem that for your own projects, if you need to have architecture-specific versions of an include file, you could put them under /usr/[local/]include/<architecture triplet>/, and the regular architecture-agnostic include files to /usr/[local/]include/. I wouldn't touch any include directories whose path name includes the major version number of the compiler without a very good reason.



          If you plan to modify glibc, and you cannot find what you need in the glibc developer documentation, you'd better ask for advice on the glibc development mailing list; glibc is extra complicated because it is usable also on architectures that use a compiler other than GCC, and so might not have the architecture triplet convention as standard.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Nov 19 at 21:23

























          answered Nov 19 at 8:21









          telcoM

          14.3k11842




          14.3k11842











          • Thank you! This was very informative. I would like to investigate further. Do you have any references I can look to for further information about the way /use/include is organized in order to achieve the goals you’ve described? I would like to know which regions of this tree are designated for the specific purposes you’ve mentioned.
            – Adam Sperry
            Nov 19 at 14:10

















          • Thank you! This was very informative. I would like to investigate further. Do you have any references I can look to for further information about the way /use/include is organized in order to achieve the goals you’ve described? I would like to know which regions of this tree are designated for the specific purposes you’ve mentioned.
            – Adam Sperry
            Nov 19 at 14:10
















          Thank you! This was very informative. I would like to investigate further. Do you have any references I can look to for further information about the way /use/include is organized in order to achieve the goals you’ve described? I would like to know which regions of this tree are designated for the specific purposes you’ve mentioned.
          – Adam Sperry
          Nov 19 at 14:10





          Thank you! This was very informative. I would like to investigate further. Do you have any references I can look to for further information about the way /use/include is organized in order to achieve the goals you’ve described? I would like to know which regions of this tree are designated for the specific purposes you’ve mentioned.
          – Adam Sperry
          Nov 19 at 14:10


















           

          draft saved


          draft discarded















































           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f482669%2fwhy-are-there-multiple-copies-of-header-files-in-usr-include%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown






          Popular posts from this blog

          How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

          Bahrain

          Postfix configuration issue with fips on centos 7; mailgun relay