From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Aug 28 21:44:03 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id VAA11626
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 28 Aug 1995 21:44:03 -0700
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.34])
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id VAA11620
          ; Mon, 28 Aug 1995 21:43:55 -0700
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id OAA31773; Tue, 29 Aug 1995 14:40:11 +1000
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 14:40:11 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199508290440.OAA31773@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: bde@zeta.org.au, terry@artisoft.com
Subject: Re: Terry's changes..
Cc: davidg@Root.COM, hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.org, julian@freefall.FreeBSD.org,
        terry@freefall.FreeBSD.org
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>Yes and no.  The printf(), of which there is an example in the
>init_main.c unless Julian has moved it already, is a bad exmaple,
>since it wants to be in the initialization code for the module
>bein initialized.  You add the module, you get the printf, you delete
>the module, the printf goes away.

Yes, the module might as well print its own data.

>You can cast the fuction pointer if you are worried about warnings,
>but the copyright stuff, I'd actually prefer as a seperate entity.

No, that would only hide the bug.  printf() isn't compatible with
`void foo(caddr_t)' and the call would break if the kernel was
compiled with -mrtd.

Bruce