Re: COMPAT_43 tty processing ?
From: Tim Robbins (tjr_at_freebsd.org)
Date: 06/25/04
- Previous message: Tim Robbins: "Re: COMPAT_43 tty processing ?"
- In reply to: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: COMPAT_43 tty processing ?"
- Next in thread: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: COMPAT_43 tty processing ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 20:42:10 +1000 To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 12:22:01PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <200406241859.54810.peter@wemm.org>, Peter Wemm writes:
> >On Wednesday 23 June 2004 04:27 pm, David Schultz wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 21, 2004, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> >> > Do we need the COMPAT_43 tty processing in 5-STABLE ?
> >>
> >> FWIW, I used to run with COMPAT_43 disabled entirely. I think the
> >> only breakage I noticed was that the Linuxolator didn't work
> >> anymore because of a number of `#ifdef COMPAT_43's in the socket
> >> code that linux.ko depends on.
> >
> >These should probably be broken out as COMPAT_OLDSOCK, whih is implied
> >by the linuxulator or COMPAT_43 or the like.
>
> Or better yet: made unncessary in the linuxolator ?
This is what NetBSD has done. At one stage I had patches derived from
their code that removed the need for the COMPAT_43 socket functions,
but COMPAT_43 was still necessary for ostat(), etc.
Tim
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Tim Robbins: "Re: COMPAT_43 tty processing ?"
- In reply to: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: COMPAT_43 tty processing ?"
- Next in thread: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: COMPAT_43 tty processing ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
