From owner-freebsd-current Fri Nov 8 3:49:20 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 838CC37B401 for ; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 03:49:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from lakemtao03.cox.net (lakemtao03.cox.net [68.1.17.242]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D226B43E77 for ; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 03:49:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ataraxia@cox.net) Received: from arkadia.nv.cox.net ([68.98.181.29]) by lakemtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20021108114918.PRDG16428.lakemtao03.cox.net@arkadia.nv.cox.net>; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 06:49:18 -0500 Received: from arkadia.nv.cox.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arkadia.nv.cox.net (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gA8BnHDd073260; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 06:49:18 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from ataraxia@arkadia.nv.cox.net) Received: (from ataraxia@localhost) by arkadia.nv.cox.net (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id gA8BnGF5073259; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 06:49:16 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from ataraxia) Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 06:49:16 -0500 (EST) From: Ray Kohler Message-Id: <200211081149.gA8BnGF5073259@arkadia.nv.cox.net> To: current@FreeBSD.ORG, imp@bsdimp.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] note the __sF change in src/UPDATING In-Reply-To: <20021108.003935.11624259.imp@bsdimp.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 8 02:45:04 2002 > Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 00:39:35 -0700 (MST) > To: current@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Re: [PATCH] note the __sF change in src/UPDATING > From: "M. Warner Losh" > > In message: <200211072337.gA7NbK1m082069@arkadia.nv.cox.net> > Ray Kohler writes: > : Hear hear, I agree. There's no need to expose what ought to be > : "private" data to the world, especially when we can get the additional > : benefit here of letting us play with the implementation. > > -current already does this. The problem is that we're trying to shoot > the bad access in the head, and that is what is screwing people. So > the problem isn't that we're trying to export private data to the > world. Quite the contrary, we're trying to eliminate it and having > growing pains. Exactly. That's why I'm arguing against putting __sF back (or adopting equally crapulent measures). Growing pains are a necessary evil. (I also agree that we probably ought to staticize any other things of this nature while we're at it and get the pain over with.) - @ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message