Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 11:38:13 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/i386/net htonl.S ntohl.S Message-ID: <20041018183813.GA52321@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20041018183011.GB10529@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <200410181719.i9IHJa9l097436@repoman.freebsd.org> <20041018173516.GB89681@ip.net.ua> <20041018174511.GA6079@dragon.nuxi.com> <20041018180319.GD89681@ip.net.ua> <20041018183011.GB10529@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--wac7ysb48OaltWcw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 11:30:11AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > > If you are burning 6.0-CURRENT bridges already, and this change > > is the step in the I386_CPU deprecation direction, why not just > > unifdef(1) this libc code, so that the "xchg" is always used? >=20 > I'm not decommisioning it -- I left a code path in there for someone who > cares about running on real I386 CPU's. I also plan on MFC'ing this to > RELENG_5 once the branch opens up. Please go read the freebsd-current > thread. As noted there we haven't built a 5-CURRENT I386 runable kernel > since 2001. Do you really think things haven't attrophied such that one > must do some work to run on an I386 at this point? Don't be too quick with the assertions; someone already reported successfully running 5.2.1 on an i386 without significant hassles. Kris --wac7ysb48OaltWcw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBdA2VWry0BWjoQKURAmncAKCoWogOsS/oCRXydPkJAMfQCT4q7QCdFp6h McUuDITAL5lDuuWgPXr4b7o= =wC3m -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --wac7ysb48OaltWcw--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041018183813.GA52321>