From owner-freebsd-standards Mon Mar 18 13:43:56 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCE3E37B400; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 13:43:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from bde.zeta.org.au (bde.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.102]) by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA27069; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 08:43:51 +1100 Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 08:43:54 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: To: Mike Barcroft Cc: "M. Warner Losh" , Subject: Re: Garrett's POSIX versions patch for review In-Reply-To: <20020318021728.D56122@espresso.q9media.com> Message-ID: <20020319083700.B2957-100000@gamplex.bde.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Mike Barcroft wrote: > I ran into a little bit of trouble when testing this. Specifically, > NOTES/LINT includes _KPOSIX_VERSION as an option. This conflicts with > the ability to define _KPOSIX_VERSION in . > > Does _KPOSIX_VERSION have any use as a kernel option? It would seem > to me that, in order to run a FreeBSD system at a different POSIX > version than the one the system was designed to run at would require > more than just a kernel configuration change. So, this define as a > kernel option doesn't really buy us anything. I agree with removing it. Only a similar compile-time option for the whole system would make sense. Too many options gives you namespace problems just for detemirmining the relevant options. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-standards" in the body of the message