From owner-freebsd-stable Thu Apr 11 7: 9: 9 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from caligula.anu.edu.au (caligula.anu.edu.au [150.203.224.42]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4668D37B405 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 07:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from avalon@localhost) by caligula.anu.edu.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA16167; Fri, 12 Apr 2002 00:08:57 +1000 (EST) From: Darren Reed Message-Id: <200204111408.AAA16167@caligula.anu.edu.au> Subject: Re: who's been smoking crack in freebsd land now ? To: bts@babbleon.org (Brian T.Schellenberger) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 00:08:57 +1000 (Australia/ACT) Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20020411135352.CCE5FBA05@i8k.babbleon.org> from "Brian T.Schellenberger" at Apr 11, 2002 09:53:52 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In some mail from Brian T.Schellenberger, sie said: > > > Geez, calm down. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. > > Also, isn't the warning pretty self-explanatory? No, it isn't. > "man ioctl" shows that sys/ioctl.h is expected to be used in userland. Yes. Last I checked, is also expected to be used by the kernel. Nearly all of is expected to be included in userland programs as well as the kernel. Or is FreeBSD going to have a completely different /usr/include/sys for user programs and the kernel just in case there is anybody out there that cares about portability that FreeBSD hasn't fucked over yet ? > And, unlike userland, it's not like the kernel has any obligation to be the > same across Unices, so I'm wondering on what you base the supposition that > God decreed the One True And Correct Way for this to work? No, you just piss people off when they have to deal with rather arbitrary fucking changes. It's not like the first time I've had to deal with crap like this in FreeBSD so I may as well get used to it, I guess. In case you have trouble working that out: it works everywhere else and used to work on FreeBSD, without any warnings until someone changed it. Well, maybe except Linux, but then Linux distros suffer badly from brain damaged include files because there's no coherancy between the kernel includes and user includes. I'm sure that's not the desired result for FreeBSD....or is it ? You should be able to compile a LKM without any compile errors, shouldn't you ? You know, an LKM that gets compiled without config'ing a kernel ? Heck, you shouldn't even need kernel source installed to compile & use an LKM. I mean isn't that the point of LKM's or has that been forgotten too ? Darren To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message