Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 09:51:07 +0200 From: Erik Trulsson <Erik.Trulsson.1013@student.uu.se> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@csail.mit.edu> Cc: Kevin Lo <kevlo@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Is AF_UNIX really deprecated? Message-ID: <20140622095107.57031ui1xqnesmi3@webmail.uu.se> In-Reply-To: <21412.31466.959351.729672@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> References: <20140619054743.GA33893@ns.kevlo.org> <21411.3294.418186.992207@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <20140620025318.GA39576@ns.kevlo.org> <21412.31466.959351.729672@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Citerar Garrett Wollman <wollman@csail.mit.edu>: > <<On Fri, 20 Jun 2014 10:53:18 +0800, Kevin Lo <kevlo@FreeBSD.org> said: > >> It seems that the word "deprecated" may lead to misunderstanding. >> The diff below removes "deprecated" to socket(2). Does it look ok? Thanks. > > I think this is an improvement. I've removed some of the unsupported > families from this listing and added others that were never > documented. We should consider whether to stop documenting the PF_* > constants and use only AF_* constants; although this is bogus in terms > of semantics, it's what POSIX has standardized. I think the PF_* constants should remain documented - if only to help understanding programs that use them. Adding a note that they are non-standardized equivalents to the AF_* constants, or something like that, would probably be a good idea though.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140622095107.57031ui1xqnesmi3>