Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 11:35:15 +0200 From: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org> Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Detect GNU/kFreeBSD in user-visible kernel headers Message-ID: <20111122093515.GK50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> In-Reply-To: <CAOfDtXNypUhu-dWznLyHcZMN-ZPSn_qTC6pSuL68r2M2hOjZTg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAOfDtXNy8r5ww5xSwhH-4w7daWdzB0KsVbO75JAOT=-Wzi%2BdHw@mail.gmail.com> <201111171632.34979.jhb@freebsd.org> <CAOfDtXMFk%2BC_eUsb6190UHHM0cgu3jf1M_M9oq4ibuYuke4pYQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOfDtXP6ShN3DezN0u4PUVt9ft__2a%2BYwo3in9w01eQnfAQ7sQ@mail.gmail.com> <20111119175620.GV50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20111120114042.GA1256@thorin> <20111120174807.GY50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20111121133954.A1108@besplex.bde.org> <20111121092749.GD50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <CAOfDtXNypUhu-dWznLyHcZMN-ZPSn_qTC6pSuL68r2M2hOjZTg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--313G32quqWeq5lpS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 06:39:26PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > (replying with Debian hat this time) >=20 > 2011/11/21 Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>: > > There are some implementations that > > use FreeBSD kernel, and which could potentially benefit from providing > > its own value for __FreeBSD_kernel. >=20 > Actually, we wouldn't be able to provide a different value for the > macro (whatever its name). Our compiler simply doesn't know which > version of the kernel it is building for. Only the headers do, but if > we define it in the headers we'd just use the FreeBSD definitions. >=20 > Our compiler defines __FreeBSD_kernel__ as an empty macro, I don't > expect this will change because unlike with FreeBSD, on Debian there > are strong technical limitations to making it a number. >=20 > If __FreeBSD_kernel__ is to be defined in FreeBSD land, may I suggest > that it is defined as an empty macro as well? This covers the vast > majority of cases (e.g. like the ones in my initial patch which > started this discussion), and it doesn't preclude the possibility that > this macro becomes a number without breaking backward compatibility. >=20 > OTOH once you define it as a number, it becomes relevant whether you > did it with #ifndef or with #undef, and so you have to commit to it. >=20 > Just to make it clear: It's no problem to me if it's defined as a > number, but it doesn't help much either. At least from Debian POV it's > not worth making a big argument about. It could be a good idea from > FreeBSD POV, but please only do this if it's useful to FreeBSD. >=20 I am fine with __FreeBSD_kernel being empty, please submit the patch. --313G32quqWeq5lpS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk7LbNMACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4gXaQCfdYpkCc+hivE5dTAUIUj7IvKa 7owAn1Myrkr9h2XERuYtrgXTEMgMATlb =uxi0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --313G32quqWeq5lpS--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111122093515.GK50300>