From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 9 00:32:06 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8651D16A4CE; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 00:32:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from www.portaone.com (support.portaone.com [195.70.151.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEDFB43D1F; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 00:32:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Received: from [192.168.0.254] ([192.168.2.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by www.portaone.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j290HLZ4079469 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 9 Mar 2005 01:17:22 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Message-ID: <422E407B.4080507@portaone.com> Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 02:16:59 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Porta Software Ltd User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alfred Perlstein References: <200503070726.j277Qhp5059059@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050308012939.GP11079@elvis.mu.org> <422DCF52.6080109@portaone.com> <20050308210414.GU11079@elvis.mu.org> <20050308232209.GX11079@elvis.mu.org> <422E3EC1.4050402@portaone.com> <20050309001301.GZ11079@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <20050309001301.GZ11079@elvis.mu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.80/685/Wed Jan 26 10:08:24 2005 clamav-milter version 0.80j on www.portaone.com X-Virus-Status: Clean cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/compat/linux linux_socket.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 00:32:06 -0000 Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Maxim Sobolev [050308 16:10] wrote: > >>Looks fine, though it's hard for me to comment about adding yet another >>flag that not present in standards. However, in my pretty >>unauthoritative opinion, since Linux has it, while many people and ISVs >>out there use it as a sort of reference when developing free software, >>it will probably make sense to support it as well, especially >>considering that it's pretty easy to do. >> >>In any case, since it's definitelty an API/ABI change (programs that use >>MSG_NOSIGNAL won't compile on older systems, while binary programs that >>use it may not work correctly on older systems) it also warrants >>__FreeBSD_version bump and proper documentation in the Porter's >>Handbook. Also the ABI argument probably puts MFC out of question. > > > Sorry, so how could it break ABI? It's just an additional flag... As I have said the binary program compiled on the newer system that uses this flag in some cases may malfunction when executed on system with older kernel due to the fact that that additional flag will become no-op the program might get SIGPIPE unexpectedly. -Maxim