From owner-freebsd-net  Sat Oct  7 18: 4:41 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu [18.24.4.193])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 45D4637B503; Sat,  7 Oct 2000 18:04:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from wollman@localhost)
	by khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA99968;
	Sat, 7 Oct 2000 21:04:32 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from wollman)
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 21:04:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-Id: <200010080104.VAA99968@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
To: itojun@iijlab.net
Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org, developers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: header bogosity in <net/radix.h>
In-Reply-To: <6077.970963640@coconut.itojun.org>
References: <6051.970963549@coconut.itojun.org>
	<6077.970963640@coconut.itojun.org>
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

<<On Sun, 08 Oct 2000 09:07:20 +0900, itojun@iijlab.net said:

> 	i believe this was here so that we can share radix.[ch] among
> 	sys/net, and sbin/routed.

And, potentially, other routing processes.  However, last time I tried
this, support had rotted sufficiently elsewhere as to require manual
edits elsewhere, so I don't see much value in keeping the non-kernel
alternative.  (I would not, however, delete the actual macros
themselves -- just be more careful about the context in which they are
defined.)

Why should OpenSSL be including <net/radix.h> anyway?

-GAWollman



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message