Date: Sun, 07 Apr 1996 10:01:25 +0100 From: "Gary Palmer" <gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-sys@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/pccard pccard.c pcic.c Message-ID: <1486.828867685@palmer.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 06 Apr 1996 17:39:34 %2B1000." <199604060739.RAA15696@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bruce Evans wrote in message ID <199604060739.RAA15696@godzilla.zeta.org.au>: > > Modified: sys/pccard pccard.c pcic.c > > Log: > > pccard.c: > > #include <i386/include/clock.h> to get sysbeep() prototype > > This should be #include <machine/clock.h>. pccard isn't supposed to > have any i386 dependencies. Similarly for i386/include/laptops.h and > a few other i386/include's. Don't change this - I'll commit it later. I agree, it shouldn't have any i386 dependencies, but using <machine/clock.h> will just mean that it's dependant on the contents of /usr/include matching whats in /sys/, which is one reason that I chose to use the <i386/include> path. I thought we were trying to make the kernel tree self-contained and not refer to /usr/include if at all possible? Gary
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1486.828867685>