Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 12:02:39 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Josef Karthauser <joe@pavilion.net> Cc: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com>, Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>, obrien@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, jkh@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Regarding setflags/getflags. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0001311155150.11560-100000@alphplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20000130165711.C52116@florence.pavilion.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 30 Jan 2000, Josef Karthauser wrote: > Sorry everyone, I wasn't reading my commit mail yesterday and maybe I should be > been doing so. What shall we do about these routines? Bruce suggested the > change of name and the move to libc at the beginning of the month. > From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> > > > I agree with you on the flags handling. Should they remain with > > the same names, or be renamed to getflags/setflags to be in keeping > > with getmode/setmode? > Jordan, shall I back this out and leave these in libutil? Put them back in no library. Putting them in libutil is what caused the current round of bootstrapping problems. The previous round didn't have problems because install(1) had statically linked functions. Changes can be limited to makefiles and unistd.h. Add .PATH statements to point to libc/gen instead of to ls and don't change any names back. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0001311155150.11560-100000>