From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jun  4 23:19:53 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6727C106566C
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed,  4 Jun 2008 23:19:53 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from max@love2party.net)
Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de
	[212.227.126.188])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE3998FC20
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed,  4 Jun 2008 23:19:52 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from max@love2party.net)
Received: from vampire.homelinux.org (dslb-088-066-062-212.pools.arcor-ip.net
	[88.66.62.212])
	by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrelayeu3) with ESMTP (Nemesis)
	id 0MKxQS-1K42Gl04Cv-0007MF; Thu, 05 Jun 2008 01:19:51 +0200
Received: (qmail 67570 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2008 23:17:54 -0000
Received: from myhost.laiers.local (192.168.4.151)
	by ns1.laiers.local with SMTP; 4 Jun 2008 23:17:54 -0000
From: Max Laier <max@love2party.net>
Organization: FreeBSD
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 01:19:24 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9
References: <4847182F.80105@ii.nl>
In-Reply-To: <4847182F.80105@ii.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200806050119.24405.max@love2party.net>
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+28Iq79P2w5r+oM5C0vKzMe3jAx4N8rvK7zLh
	JaRoGpYlFa3t+vV68SrOGNOzH+1iNhku0A2AyunoC5nb6w4UXt
	Obmdo45ZNzxids2l30hFQ==
Cc: Nanno Langstraat <nlcom_os@ii.nl>
Subject: Re: Standard byteorder functions across BSD / Linux
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:19:53 -0000

On Thursday 05 June 2008 00:33:19 Nanno Langstraat wrote:
> My question to FreeBSD:
> I don't use FreeBSD myself, but I'll prepare a patch if you like the
> idea and if you indicate what you'll accept:
>
>     * <endian.h> or <sys/endian.h> ?
>       I maintain that it should be <endian.h> for user applications:
>       IMHO <sys/> is for the user-kernel API, and byteorder belongs to
>       libc not the kernel API.
>       glibc apparently agrees, OpenBSD disagreed.

Not sure about this.  There might be namespace issues with this approach, 
though there probably shouldn't.  It's obviously not a problem to have 
both, but getting rid of sys/endian.h now is too late for sure.

>     * You're OK with userspace applications standardizing on OpenBSD's
>       original betoh64() instead of FreeBSD's derivate be64toh() ?

I'm all for this.  We should keep the both for backward compatibility and 
it will probably take some fixing to hunt down all ported code that does 
define betoh64 on its own.

-- 
/"\  Best regards,                      | mlaier@freebsd.org
\ /  Max Laier                          | ICQ #67774661
 X   http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/  | mlaier@EFnet
/ \  ASCII Ribbon Campaign              | Against HTML Mail and News