Add final rtnetlink constants

[jbaublitz]

This is a follow up to the PR #1351 which is for issue #1059 as it was closed before I realized there's one last set of netlink constants needed for use with rtnetlink. I'm marking this as WIP until I've verified everything's good with CI and that I've included all necessary constants. I'll remove WIP once it's passing CI and it's ready for review.

[rust-highfive]

r? @gnzlbg

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[gnzlbg]

@bors: r+

[bors]

📋 Looks like this PR is still in progress, ignoring approval.

Hint: Remove WIP from this PR's title when it is ready for review.

[gnzlbg]

good bot

[jbaublitz]

@gnzlbg All right, should be good to go. Thanks!

[gnzlbg]

@bors: r+

[bors]

📌 Commit dfb119d has been approved by gnzlbg

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit dfb119d with merge 11f3f27...

[bors]

💥 Test timed out

[gnzlbg]

@bors: r+

[bors]

💡 This pull request was already approved, no need to approve it again.

• This pull request previously failed. You should add more commits to fix the bug, or use retry to trigger a build again.

[bors]

📌 Commit dfb119d has been approved by gnzlbg

[jbaublitz]

@bors: retry

[bors]

@jbaublitz: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: not in try users

[jbaublitz]

Killjoy bot 🙁

[gnzlbg]

@bors: retry

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit dfb119d with merge c4b609a...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-cirrus, checks-travis, status-appveyor
Approved by: gnzlbg
Pushing c4b609a to master...

[skrap]

@jbaublitz: was there a reason that you did not include the RTM message type defines in here? Like RTM_NEWLINK, RTM_DELLINK, etc?

[jbaublitz]

@skrap Oversight on my part due to the formatting for the man 7 rtnetlink docs. This should be included. I'll put together another PR for libc and (as I'm guessing this is why you're asking) I'll provide support in neli.

[skrap]

@jbaublitz: Hah, yeah, you're onto me 😆 . I'd be more than happy to help out in some way — perhaps I could provide something to add to the neli examples collection using some of those new constants?

[jeromegn]

I probably don't know enough, but is there a reason these constants can't be added for musl? If I had to guess: they're not defined in musl.

Trying to use rtnetlink with a musl target is not possible right now.

[jbaublitz]

@jeromegn Are you using libc directly? If so, only certain constants should not be usuable from musl. The rest are in both GNU and musl.

[jeromegn]

I'm not, but rtnetlink requires constants such as NETLINK_CAP_ACK. Sorry, this is likely the wrong place to write about this (I realize this now).

I should look into neli and see if it compiles on x86 64 unknown musl.

[jbaublitz]

I've tried to make neli compatible with musl because of what I learned doing this PR so please file an issue with neli and I'd be happy to take a look if it doesn't work as expected. If you need additional constants through neli, also file an issue there and I'll do another PR to libc.