From owner-cvs-user  Fri Aug 25 17:26:31 1995
Return-Path: cvs-user-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id RAA11435
          for cvs-user-outgoing; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 17:26:31 -0700
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.34])
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id RAA11408
          ; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 17:26:02 -0700
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id KAA06952; Sat, 26 Aug 1995 10:19:05 +1000
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 10:19:05 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199508260019.KAA06952@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: gibbs@freefall.FreeBSD.org, markm@freefall.FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/eBones/registerd Makefile registerd.c
Cc: CVS-commiters@freefall.FreeBSD.org, cvs-user@freefall.FreeBSD.org
Sender: cvs-user-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>Was there a reason for changing all function declarations from:

>static send_recv(pkt,rpkt,f,_to,addrs)
>    KTEXT pkt;
>    KTEXT rpkt;
>    int f;
>    struct sockaddr_in *_to;
>    struct hostent *addrs;
>{

>to:

>static int send_recv(KTEXT pkt, KTEXT rpkt, int f, struct sockaddr_in *_to,
>    struct hostent *addrs)
>{

Perhaps lack of a visible policy in this area.

>I don't view this as a cleanup at all.  It makes unnecessary conflicts with
>the original code and makes it more difficult to incomperate patches from
>outside sources.

I agree.

However, if the original really didn't have an explicit return type, then
there is no way to get it through gcc -Wall -Wreally-all without changing
the key line of the declaration.

Bruce