From owner-cvs-all  Tue Feb 20 13:54:56 2001
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from gw.nectar.com (gw.nectar.com [208.42.49.153])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 2466737B491; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 13:54:49 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from nectar@nectar.com)
Received: from hamlet.nectar.com (hamlet.nectar.com [10.0.1.102])
	by gw.nectar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id C215E18C92; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 15:54:47 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from nectar@localhost)
	by hamlet.nectar.com (8.11.2/8.9.3) id f1KLslR60964;
	Tue, 20 Feb 2001 15:54:47 -0600 (CST)
	(envelope-from nectar@spawn.nectar.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 15:54:47 -0600
From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>
Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>,
	"Pierre Y. Dampure" <pierre.dampure@westmarsh.com>,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys user.h
Message-ID: <20010220155447.A60954@hamlet.nectar.com>
Mail-Followup-To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com>,
	Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>,
	John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>,
	"Pierre Y. Dampure" <pierre.dampure@westmarsh.com>,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org
References: <XFMail.010219175624.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <95465.982704647@critter>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <95465.982704647@critter>; from phk@critter.freebsd.dk on Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 10:30:47PM +0100
X-Url: http://www.nectar.com/
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 10:30:47PM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> 
> >> 
> >> Hmm... I think you added this field without updating KINFO_PROC_SIZE --
> >> we now get warnings at boot time about the size of kinfo_proc differing
> >> from KINFO_PROC_SIZE.
> >
> >That needs to die.  I think a scheme like the following will work:
> 
> <humour>
> I'm starting to lean towards plan-9 again...
> </humour>
> 
> I think that a simple version number will be sufficient and that a sizeof
> will be convenient.  I don't think the sizeof should be a #define like
> now, but rather an actual sizeof().
> 
> The current #define SIZEOF is unlikely to work on Bruce's i386/64bit-long
> kernel for instance.
> 
> if we want to go _way out_ we define the structures with XDR.

<frightening why="half-serious">
  XDR?  Hmpf.  ASN.1 and PER encoding.
</frightening>

-- 
Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message