Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 4 Mar 2008 17:39:21 +0200
From:      Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>
To:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Comments on pmake diffs for building on Linux
Message-ID:  <20080304153920.GB61036@kobe.laptop>
In-Reply-To: <20080304153128.GC27540@saraswathy.madambakam.org>
References:  <20080303.224256.635730757.imp@bsdimp.com> <200803041701.36466.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20080304153128.GC27540@saraswathy.madambakam.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2008-03-04 21:01, Girish Venkatachalam <girishvenkatachalam@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 17:01:28 Mar 04, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>> I did this a while ago when porting some of our code to Linux because it
>> builds with pmake..
>>
>> Your patches are much nicer than mine however :)
>>
>> The tailq stuff could be shoved into a linux.h or some such.. So it's
>> more obvious what it's for and why it's there.
>>
>
> PMI but why do I see tailq in gentoo?
>
> I was taken by surprise when I found my code compile and run beautifully
> few months ago.
>
> I am wondering if that is the case, then why port it?

Minor compatibility nits here and there, which can turn a simple
TAILQ_FOREACH() call to a nightmare of nested preprocessor hells :)




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080304153920.GB61036>