From owner-freebsd-current  Tue Oct  7 01:44:10 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id BAA09762
          for current-outgoing; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 01:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current)
Received: from labinfo.iet.unipi.it (labinfo.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.5])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA09736
          for <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 01:43:59 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it)
Received: from localhost (luigi@localhost) by labinfo.iet.unipi.it (8.6.5/8.6.5) id IAA07641; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 08:13:12 +0100
From: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
Message-Id: <199710070713.IAA07641@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
Subject: Re: how to detect different kernel code (select or poll)
To: hasty@rah.star-gate.com (Amancio Hasty)
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 08:13:12 +0100 (MET)
Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu,
        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <199710070559.WAA00280@rah.star-gate.com> from "Amancio Hasty" at Oct 6, 97 10:58:48 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Hi,
> 
> I think that our current problem is that the poll code is not in 
> 2.2 and whoever checked in the code  should have at least thought of the
> incompatibility issues . One option is not to support 2.2
> which the poll check in so far seems to imply at least with

making things unsupported in the RELEASE is not an option in my
opinion, unless there are strong technical motivations against it,
and this is not the case.

I browsed through the various files involved in the poll change
and could not find any way the preprocessor could tell the difference.
So I have used a new macro, USE_POLL, which must be defined in
sound.h by users who want to compile this code on 3.0.

Fortunately it is used only in one function and one other place, so its
removal should be fine when this code finally finds its way into 2.2.X

I am finishing the modifications and will put a new snap of the code on
my web server quite soon.

	Cheers
	Luigi