Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 14:03:38 -0800 (PST) From: "David E. O'Brien" <obrien> To: chuckr@glue.umd.edu (Chuck Robey) Cc: imp@village.org, ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Niklas Hallqvist: archivers/hpack.non-usa.only Message-ID: <199701092203.OAA24239@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.3.95.970109160201.5886A-100000@thurston.eng.umd.edu> from "Chuck Robey" at Jan 9, 97 04:03:24 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > : I don't know ... does sys/param.h exist on _every_ last system that has > > : unix or __unix__ defined? If not, the code above is a fatal error, and no > > : good. If it's guaranteed true, it's fine, and I'd use it. > > > > It does seem to exist on almost every unix system today. I'm in the > > process of looking for examples that aren't true. I'd say that at > > least 99.999% of all systems that define unix or __unix__ have > > sys/param.h based on my porting experiences. If this is truely the case, I *really* like it. Ok, I'll look on the non FreeBSD machines I have access to. If I don't hear good things about sys/param.h by tomarrow morning (PST), then I'll talk with the other *BSD's and try to get them to included this. Otherwise, I'll try to prophose it. > deciding whether to include param.h for a long time. If Satoshi agrees > with this method too, we oughta enshrine it in the porting section of the > handbook. If everyone agrees, I'll even take the time to add this as soon as I get back on Saturday. -- David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701092203.OAA24239>