From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Sep 3 17:57: 4 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91BD237B400 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 17:57:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out011.verizon.net (out011pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.135]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E091543E3B for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 17:57:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from arlankfo@verizon.net) Received: from verizon.net ([138.88.7.120]) by out011.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20020904005701.FCBF17563.out011.verizon.net@verizon.net> for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 19:57:01 -0500 To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 64 bit API/ABI changes proposal for -current From: "Andrew Lankford" Reply-To: "Andrew Lankford" Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 20:57:04 -0400 Message-Id: <20020904005701.FCBF17563.out011.verizon.net@verizon.net> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At the risk of butting into an important thread and revealing my total ignorance about all this stuff, I notice that NetBSD claims to be "64 bit clean" since "1.0", right down to FFS (I looked around the NetBSD mailing lists recently for discussions about UFS2--there didn't appear to be much interest in their camp for it, kind of odd I thought) . So does that mean they had to make big changes to their system call interface/ABI? If so, would their experiences/approach be of any use to FreeBSD? Andrew Lankford To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message