Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 09:50:05 -0800 From: Paul Traina <pst@cisco.com> To: "JULIAN Elischer" <julian@ref.tfs.com> Cc: julian@freebsd.org, hsu@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gratuitous changes to db/hash.c for threadsafe operation? Message-ID: <199602271750.JAA10649@puli.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 26 Feb 1996 19:23:29 PST." <199602270323.TAA14264@ref.tfs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Damn, yuck. OK, thanks. From: "JULIAN Elischer" <julian@ref.tfs.com> Subject: Re: gratuitous changes to db/hash.c for threadsafe operation? It clashes with the errno in the thread_safe libc which is a MACRO #define errno (*__errno(current_thread)) or something similar this is true in almost every threads package in the world... > > > Does anyone know why the "errno" value in the hash structure was renamed > to "error"? This seems to be a gratuitous change that was made to the > hash code, and I'd like to reverse it out if no one has a particularly > good reason for its existance. > > You two show up as reviewers of this code, so perhaps you can explain > it to me? > > I've incorporated the latest version of the db code into the csrg branch > and would like to bring it into the mainline. I'll preserve these changes > if they serve a purpose, but I see none served here after looking at this > pretty closely, so my default inclination is to revert the code to match > the original author's. > > Paul >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199602271750.JAA10649>