Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:00:23 +0930
From:      Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
To:        Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Cc:        cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/isofs/cd9660 cd9660_bmap.c cd9660_lookup.c cd9660_node.c cd9660_rrip.c cd9660_util.c cd9660_vfsops.c cd9660_vnops.c
Message-ID:  <20010423190023.D37321@wantadilla.lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0104231911490.4712-100000@besplex.bde.org>; from bde@zeta.org.au on Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 07:25:09PM %2B1000
References:  <20010423183839.C37321@wantadilla.lemis.com> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0104231911490.4712-100000@besplex.bde.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday, 23 April 2001 at 19:25:09 +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Greg Lehey wrote:
>
>> On Monday, 23 April 2001 at 18:57:53 +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
>>> Arggh.  This is the start of breaking the includes in approx. 133 files to
>>> work with recent breakage in <sys/mount.h>.  Approx. 133 files that have
>>> nothing to do with either networking or radixes now need to include
>>> <net/radix.h>.
>>
>> Well, it doesn't exactly seem to be correct to redefine AF_MAX in
>> sys/mount.h to get around it.  But pass me the pointy hat: I checked
>> with make world and forgot LINT.
>
> Defining AF_MAX in 2 places is easier than having a whole header just for
> defining AF_MAX.  The definitions won't get out of sync, because building
> kernels will give warnings about them being different, and committed code
> doesn't cause warnings ;-).
>
> The include of <net/radix.h> is unrelated to this.  <net/radix.h> is already
> close to being a secondary header that is included in primary headers like
> <sys/mount.h> and <net/route.h>.  It is only included directly in a few
> networking .c files, and half of those includes are bogus anyway, since
> the files also include <net/route.h>.  (<net/route.h> doesn't include
> <net/radix.h> if RNF_NORMAL is defined, but I don't see how defining
> RNF_NORMAL could actually work in the kernel.  It is apparently intended
> for permitting an alternative to <net/radix.h>, but since other parts of
> the kernel just include <net/radix.h>, there would probably be at best
> namespace conflicts with any alternative.)

Good analysis.  You didn't answer the second part of my message:

> So what would you suggest?

At the moment, GENERIC builds.  LINT doesn't.  I have the fixes to
LINT ready to commit, but there's not much point if you think I should
back all the crap out.

> BTW, 133 is from "grep -c sys/mount.h LINT/.depend".

Yes, I thought as much.

Greg
--
Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010423190023.D37321>