Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 20:43:33 +0200 From: Michael Tuexen <tuexen@fh-muenster.de> To: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Xin LI <delphij@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r241916 - in head/sys: netinet netinet6 Message-ID: <B10715D3-38FC-4B27-9E01-21A457C0B29D@fh-muenster.de> In-Reply-To: <20121024052525.T4723@besplex.bde.org> References: <201210222149.q9MLnvrt014543@svn.freebsd.org> <20121023142219.K1008@besplex.bde.org> <FD4A4199-80DB-4D24-8468-29CA121DD1D9@fh-muenster.de> <20121024052525.T4723@besplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Oct 23, 2012, at 8:28 PM, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Tue, 23 Oct 2012, Michael Tuexen wrote: >=20 >> On Oct 23, 2012, at 6:23 AM, Bruce Evans wrote: >>=20 >>> On Mon, 22 Oct 2012, Xin LI wrote: >>>=20 >>>> Log: >>>> Remove __P. >>>=20 >>> This was a chance to remove style bugs in the prototypes. At least = it >>> didn't create so many new ones, unlike the original __P axing. It >>> still enlarged about a hundred by changing from Gnu style = continuation >>> to Gnu style continuation indentation with an off-by-5 error. >>=20 >> please note that the SCTP code in the FreeBSD sources is generated >> via an export script from a codebase which runs on multiple = platforms. >> The script tries to follow FreeBSDs guidelines, but is far from being >> perfect. >=20 > The export script might not like manual editing of its output. >=20 > Portability might require __P(()), and then removing it cleaning = requires > a complicated script. Maybe I wasn't clear... * The removal of __P() needs also be done upstream. I'll handle this, = not problem. I don't think we need __P on any platform. * My comment was regarding your list of formatting issues of the code. = Changing the formatting would require changing the export script. If someone "just" changes the FreeBSD sources and these changes are = not included upstream, they are lost by the next commit of rrs@ or mine. My point was: Getting rid of __P is fine and we can handle that upstream = (as any other non whitespace/formatting changes needed), but changing the = formatting is NOT that easy. I'm sorry about that and just wanted to let you know = that there is a reason why the style 9 stuff is not followed exactly within = the SCTP code. I hope this makes the situation clearer. Best regards Michael >=20 > Bruce >=20
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B10715D3-38FC-4B27-9E01-21A457C0B29D>