Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 17:19:34 -0500 (EST) From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> To: Steve Kiernan <stevek@tislabs.com> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: breakage still in sys/systm.h Message-ID: <200003242219.RAA46260@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10003241706260.13885-100000@mufasa.va.tislabs.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10003241706260.13885-100000@mufasa.va.tislabs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 17:12:32 -0500 (EST), Steve Kiernan <stevek@tislabs.com> said: > The definitions of major() and minor() in sys/systm.h break usage of the > header. Since sys/types.h defines major() and minor() as macros which > compute the major and minor numbers, this creates an order dependency on > sys/systm.h and sys/types.h. Is this not a bad thing? No, since they don't conflict. <sys/types.h> defines the major and minor macros iff _KERNEL is not defined, and <sys/systm.h> is a kernel-only header. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same wollman@lcs.mit.edu | O Siem / The fires of freedom Opinions not those of| Dance in the burning flame MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - Susan Aglukark and Chad Irschick To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200003242219.RAA46260>