Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 16:25:09 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.ORG>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Removing wait union Message-ID: <20020603162508.A34224@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20020603011903.Y2566-100000@gamplex.bde.org>; from bde@zeta.org.au on Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 01:22:14AM %2B1000 References: <20020602010108.B16166@espresso.q9media.com> <20020603011903.Y2566-100000@gamplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 01:22:14AM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Sun, 2 Jun 2002, Mike Barcroft wrote: >=20 > > Does anyone have any objections to removing the deprecated 4.2/4.3BSD > > wait union in <sys/wait.h>? It's been deprecating since Rev 1.1 and > > there are only a few consumers in the base system. Attached are two > > patches, one to removing it from <sys/wait.h> and the other to remove > > its consumers. Changes to lpd(8) sent directly to its maintainer. >=20 > I think the only potential problem is use of the compatibility cruft > in deprecware outside the base system. It would be useful to have a > quick way to determine how many ports a change in a standard header > affects. I'm always happy to test proposed patches on the ports cluster. Kris --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE8+/rUWry0BWjoQKURAoc1AJ9DfgkeWMjOFrfKhaRqoW0HTYjOEQCgpq+2 43QlUzTdjMYaVH8g0uN/Tsw= =AC41 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020603162508.A34224>