From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Nov 22 19:14:51 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF6F0106564A;
	Tue, 22 Nov 2011 19:14:51 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rmh.aybabtu@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com
	[209.85.210.182])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B7788FC08;
	Tue, 22 Nov 2011 19:14:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by iakl21 with SMTP id l21so900530iak.13
	for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 11:14:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
	:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
	bh=M17aGCBWLZN3WOgt09ff64Dq7K1toKW/SAXpJ1u6YZo=;
	b=hgxG3zRqlKSIkVW2gAziUYKAjPgC6TfO5ORg5JP9n+RjYzg8h09l/7CE9shFv4Z+57
	VMPdOvvxkWVm05ngHywZS+jeQWyA4OMW4NWjwAVT+/m5kVEKYVDovgojDtVDG+LhWxtG
	/HV3TeQLMZ2oZJNEgPNphwGQ/uZWgfTptqSas=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.149.165 with SMTP id ub5mr23634748igb.23.1321989290944;
	Tue, 22 Nov 2011 11:14:50 -0800 (PST)
Sender: rmh.aybabtu@gmail.com
Received: by 10.42.222.200 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 11:14:50 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20111122185300.GC1979@hoeg.nl>
References: <CAOfDtXMFk+C_eUsb6190UHHM0cgu3jf1M_M9oq4ibuYuke4pYQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOfDtXP6ShN3DezN0u4PUVt9ft__2a+Ywo3in9w01eQnfAQ7sQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111119175620.GV50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
	<20111120114042.GA1256@thorin>
	<20111120174807.GY50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
	<20111121133954.A1108@besplex.bde.org>
	<20111121092749.GD50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
	<CAOfDtXNypUhu-dWznLyHcZMN-ZPSn_qTC6pSuL68r2M2hOjZTg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111122093515.GK50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
	<20111122175340.GA44367@thorin> <20111122185300.GC1979@hoeg.nl>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:14:50 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2Xb0MP5xOIceOmfUw2vLCENP3bg
Message-ID: <CAOfDtXN1PTP=2NW966Xg2EjC8Hs4id2tzY7tsM8t6i1RLE66Xw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Millan <rmh@freebsd.org>
To: Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>,
	freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Detect GNU/kFreeBSD in user-visible kernel headers
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 19:14:52 -0000

Hi Ed,

2011/11/22 Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>:
>> +#undef __FreeBSD_kernel__
>> +#define __FreeBSD_kernel__
>
> So why not remove the #undef and not let the compiler define it at all?

Well I have no objection if the #undef is removed.

I don't understand why you consider it a problem though.  It's not
terribly useful but if compilers can opt in and define it (usually as
an empty macro), this doesn't hurt either AFAICT.  The problem I
described before was about compilers being forced to provide a number.

Anyhow, I don't think it makes a big difference.