From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jan  4 13:00:59 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id NAA00141 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 4 Jan 1995 13:00:59 -0800
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.34]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with ESMTP id NAA00134 for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 4 Jan 1995 13:00:48 -0800
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id HAA04453; Thu, 5 Jan 1995 07:56:32 +1100
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 07:56:32 +1100
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199501042056.HAA04453@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, j@uriah.sax.de
Subject: Re: Never mind on the "mcopy busy"
Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

>I've noticed that FreeBSD 2's flock() is binary incompatible with
>FreeBSD 1.1.5's.  My older copy of elm refuses to work now under 2.0,
>i get an `flock: invalid argument'.

`struct flock' starts with an off_t, so the struct is totally
incompatible with the 1.1.5 version.

>I hope it isn't intention for FreeBSD 2 to be binary incompatible to
>its ancestors? :-/

The change of `struct stat' due to fatter off_t's and other features is
handled by having completely new syscalls for stat, fstat and lstat.  
Apparently the problem with struct flock was overlooked.

Bruce