From owner-cvs-usrbin Sun Jun 1 02:58:20 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id CAA16536 for cvs-usrbin-outgoing; Sun, 1 Jun 1997 02:58:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id CAA16530; Sun, 1 Jun 1997 02:58:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from smap@localhost) by dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id EAA29790; Sun, 1 Jun 1997 04:57:39 -0500 (CDT) Received: from sjx-ca25-02.ix.netcom.com(204.30.65.194) by dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3) id sma029788; Sun Jun 1 04:57:37 1997 Received: (from asami@localhost) by blimp.mimi.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) id CAA28142; Sun, 1 Jun 1997 02:57:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 02:57:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199706010957.CAA28142@blimp.mimi.com> To: pst@shockwave.com CC: gpalmer@freebsd.org, cvs-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, cvs-usrbin@freebsd.org In-reply-to: <199705311551.IAA20420@precipice.shockwave.com> (message from Paul Traina on Sat, 31 May 1997 08:51:14 -0700) Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/top machine.c From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) Sender: owner-cvs-usrbin@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk * Do you realize how much userland code would break if we upped the namespace * in 2.2? Not much, as far as I can tell. I changed utmp.h and param.h and recompiled world and kernel on all my 2.2 machines around here. After rebuilding ssh, xterm, kterm and xdm, all my machines are running fine. (I did this so I can dual-boot to 2.2 and 3.0, by the way.) It is my opinion that changes of this sort (including login.conf) should be held back from merging. With 3.0 going totally bezerk with smp and related changes, it seems like our releases are going to come out of the 2.2 branch for quite a while, and we don't want it to become stale like the 2.1 branch was. On the other hand, if we can somehow shield this information from userland code (didn't Joerg (?) mention adding functions to libutil to get these in runtime?), maybe it's even better (and no need to worry about differences between 2.2 and 3.0, at least for this...). Satoshi