Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 01 Jun 2005 00:52:49 +0900
From:      Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@freebsd.org>
To:        des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=)
Cc:        nectar@freebsd.org, standards@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [CFR] correct type of addrinfo.ai_addrlen and netent.n_net
Message-ID:  <ygesm03ie9a.wl%ume@mahoroba.org>
In-Reply-To: <86fyw32yqm.fsf@xps.des.no>
References:  <ygezmub1t1c.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> <20050531.075329.118637972.imp@bsdimp.com> <ygevf4zihhz.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> <20050531.084832.20036038.imp@bsdimp.com> <ygeu0kjigeg.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> <86fyw32yqm.fsf@xps.des.no>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,

>>>>> On Tue, 31 May 2005 17:37:05 +0200
>>>>> Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav <des@des.no> said:

des> You can't just bump libpam; you need to bump all the modules along
des> with it, because libpam will only load modules with the same major
des> number as itself.  In fact, there is only a single SHLIB_MAJOR for the
des> entire src/lib/libpam tree, in src/lib/libpam/Makefile.inc.

Thank you for clarification.  My patch bumps SHLIB_MAJOR in
lib/libpam/Makefile.inc.

des> Is it really necessary to remove the padding?  It gives us a lot of
des> trouble for zero gain.

I think such cleanup should be done before major release.  However, if
our consensus doesn't want to remove the padding, I'll stop removing
it.

Sincerely,

--
Hajimu UMEMOTO @ Internet Mutual Aid Society Yokohama, Japan
ume@mahoroba.org  ume@{,jp.}FreeBSD.org
http://www.imasy.org/~ume/



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ygesm03ie9a.wl%ume>