From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Feb 27 14:39:23 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from green.bikeshed.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 924DA37B41B; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 14:39:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (green@localhost) by green.bikeshed.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g1RMd8i46060; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 17:39:08 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from green@green.bikeshed.org) Message-Id: <200202272239.g1RMd8i46060@green.bikeshed.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: bde@FreeBSD.org Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Do we want the _SYS_SYSPROTO_H_ junk? From: Brian Fundakowski Feldman Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 17:39:07 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Since obviously, by nature, all the code for syscall declarations inside #ifdef _SYS_SYSPROTO_H_ is bogus, is it truly useful to use it on new system calls, or should we not? I think it's worth having an entry in style(9) for system calls, and want to know what should be there regarding this. It seems the struct foo_args /* structure members stuff */ *uap; stuff is at least also consistent with what is similarly done with vnode operation declarations. What do you think? -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\ <> green@FreeBSD.org <> bfeldman@tislabs.com \ The Power to Serve! \ Opinions expressed are my own. \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message