From owner-freebsd-current Thu Sep 13 13:38:54 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from InterJet.elischer.org (c421509-a.pinol1.sfba.home.com [24.7.86.9]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B22D37B403; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 13:38:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA65308; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 14:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 14:20:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: Warner Losh Cc: John Baldwin , current@freeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/msdosfs denode.h msdosfs_denode.c msdosfs_lookup.c msdosfs_vfsops.c msdosfs_vnops.c In-Reply-To: <200109132029.f8DKT9t13894@harmony.village.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Warner Losh wrote: > In message Julian Elischer writes: > : Why are you doing this? > : having pointers to threads that are calle proc is going to be REALLY > : confusing! > > I did the opposite to make my stuff more portable to -stable. Eg, I > was able to get away with '#define thread proc' given my use of the > struct thread/proc. > > I find changes of this nature to be espeically bad for people that > have to live in multiple versions of the OS. changes of which nature (It's not sure if you are FOR #define proc thread or against it.. (It wouldn't be so bad if it were #define task thread on one OS and #define task proc on another.. > > Warner > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message