Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 14:41:30 +1100 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: andreas@knobel.gun.de, lehey.pad@sni.de Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, ports@freebsd.org, pst@cisco.com Subject: Re: Another Pentium gcc patch, -D__FreeBSD__=2 -Dbsd4_4 Message-ID: <199602020341.OAA25135@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> > I think that the gcc *should* define bsd4_4 (or similar). There's >> > plenty of software out there which doesn't care which 4.4BSD-derived >> > system you're running, and this would help, just like __386bsd__ used >> > to be useful. >Agreed. So I think, too. So could we meet in the middle, that >we add this definition as long as it doesn't disturb us ? >I only see the usefullness as __386BSD__... Both have negative usefulness. __386BSD__ says that the system is 386BSD, which it isn't. bsd4_4 may say that the system is BSD.4.4, which FreeBSD isn't. Defining __FreeBSD__ in the compiler is almost as bad. The compiler has very little to do with the version of FreeBSD that the compiler runs on. Defining __FreeBSD__ anywhere is almost as bad... Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199602020341.OAA25135>