Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 09:15:56 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: phk@phk.freebsd.dk Cc: yar@comp.chem.msu.su, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SET, CLR, ISSET in types.h for _KERNEL builds Message-ID: <20060705.091556.513891519.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <28872.1151526546@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <20060628150227.R75801@fledge.watson.org> <28872.1151526546@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <28872.1151526546@critter.freebsd.dk>
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> writes:
: In message <20060628150227.R75801@fledge.watson.org>, "Andrew R. Reiter" writes
: :
: >
: >I apologize for top posting, but I lost the email that I think my
: >point/question pertains to.
: >
: >Part of this seems to be for compatibility / merging from drivers of other
: >OSes, no? If I am wrong, ignore me :-). If this is the case, would it be
: >better to create some common other area for things of this nature so that
: >it suffices to allow builds, but does not infect other areas of our own
: >code base?
:
: That's what I proposed too: #include <sys/netbsd_compat.h>
This is even lamer. It makes no sense to invent a stupid place for a
compatibility define. Might as well put the definition of NULL in
limits.h.
I'm killing this idea because people hate it.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060705.091556.513891519.imp>