From owner-freebsd-current Tue Dec 19 00:12:57 1995 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id AAA29919 for current-outgoing; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 00:12:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from critter.tfs.com ([140.145.230.252]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA29906 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 00:12:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.tfs.com (localhost.tfs.com [127.0.0.1]) by critter.tfs.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA22411; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 17:34:37 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: critter.tfs.com: Host localhost.tfs.com didn't use HELO protocol To: Paul Richards cc: FreeBSD-current@freebsd.org (FreeBSD current mailing list) Subject: Re: FreeBSD-current-stable ??? In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 18 Dec 1995 16:25:54 GMT." <199512181625.QAA05747@cadair.elsevier.co.uk> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 17:34:36 +0100 Message-ID: <22409.819304476@critter.tfs.com> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > In reply to Poul-Henning Kamp who said > > > > >I< don't know of any interface changes yet between 2.1 and 2.2 There > > is no change in sysctl(3) there is no change to malloc. I would > > argue that you missed your shot, unless you can show me a piece of > > code that needs an ifdef for "post-2.1" > > That's really not the issue. I'm not expecting such clear incompatibilties > that an #ifdef 2.1 would be required (although the vm header changes would > in fact require that so there you are, I have an example). You can apply the same fix in 2.1, it's the 2.1 src that is bogus. > It should be clear to everyone that it's a dumb idea to go and tell > people to work on user-land code under a different version of the OS. If people don't have the resources to do kernel work, then it would be stupid to tell them to go away, rather than to point them at user-land. > > Now this is true, but it doesn't mean that people should hack around > > in their kernels, does it ? > > No, I wasn't disagreeing that there's lots of user-land things to do. > I was arguing against telling them to work in a 2.1 environment. I > think it might be instructive if you grabbed something from 2.1 and > tried to compile it under -current. Well, I hope we have a snap of -current in Jan for exactly this reason. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | phk@FreeBSD.ORG FreeBSD Core-team. http://www.freebsd.org/~phk | phk@login.dknet.dk Private mailbox. whois: [PHK] | phk@ref.tfs.com TRW Financial Systems, Inc. Future will arrive by its own means, progress not so.