Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 09:15:56 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: phk@phk.freebsd.dk Cc: yar@comp.chem.msu.su, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SET, CLR, ISSET in types.h for _KERNEL builds Message-ID: <20060705.091556.513891519.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <28872.1151526546@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <20060628150227.R75801@fledge.watson.org> <28872.1151526546@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <28872.1151526546@critter.freebsd.dk> "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> writes: : In message <20060628150227.R75801@fledge.watson.org>, "Andrew R. Reiter" writes : : : > : >I apologize for top posting, but I lost the email that I think my : >point/question pertains to. : > : >Part of this seems to be for compatibility / merging from drivers of other : >OSes, no? If I am wrong, ignore me :-). If this is the case, would it be : >better to create some common other area for things of this nature so that : >it suffices to allow builds, but does not infect other areas of our own : >code base? : : That's what I proposed too: #include <sys/netbsd_compat.h> This is even lamer. It makes no sense to invent a stupid place for a compatibility define. Might as well put the definition of NULL in limits.h. I'm killing this idea because people hate it. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060705.091556.513891519.imp>