From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Jan 30 2:34:16 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mass.dis.org (dhcp45-21.dis.org [216.240.45.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0554D37B416 for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2002 02:34:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mass.dis.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mass.dis.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g0UAYLb01598 for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2002 02:34:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from msmith@mass.dis.org) Message-Id: <200201301034.g0UAYLb01598@mass.dis.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: __P macro question In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 30 Jan 2002 12:33:03 +0200." <63553.1012386783@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 02:34:21 -0800 From: Michael Smith 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 > I think the original idea was to do it for HEAD only, to avoid unnecessary > deltas for RELENG_4 cvsup users. Since 5.0-RELEASE has been delayed, it > probably doesn't make sense for the purge to happen until the advent of > the RELENG_5 branch. We don't want gratuitous diffs like this making > merges onto RELENG_4 difficult. Actually, eliminating __P() will have little or no effect on merge activity. It's a headerfile construct, typically only found in function prototype blocks. The sort of noise that would be generated by removing it is fairly trivially identified and ignored, compared to any of the other, massively intrusive changes that are going on. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message