Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 23:51:22 -0800 (PST) From: asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG, sanpei@yy.cs.keio.ac.jp, max@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: __FreeBSD_version Message-ID: <199702210751.XAA02773@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I did a find/grep of all "__FreeBSD_version"s in the ports tree, and have fixed most of them. They will be committed shortly. (In case you missed the commit message, 2.2-* is now "220000" and 3.0-* is now "300000".) However, I'm not sure what to do with the following three ports. In each case, it is drawing a line between 199607 (2.1.5R) and 199608 (2.2-current right after 2.1.5 is released), so the question is whether it just meant "on the 2.1 branch" (at that time, of course it was correct) or was it really fixed in 2.1.6R? (1) net/ucd-snmp (maintainer gpalmer) === +#if __FreeBSD_version > 199607 + struct rlisthdr swaplist; + struct rlist *swapptr; +#else + struct rlist *swaplist; +#endif === (2) net/wide-dhcp (maintainer sanpei) === +#if __FreeBSD_version < 199608 + snd.ether->ether_type = ETHERTYPE_IP; +#else snd.ether->ether_type = htons(ETHERTYPE_IP); +#endif === (3) net/cap (maintainer max) === -#ifdef __FreeBSD__ +#if defined(__FreeBSD__) && __FreeBSD_version <= 199607 /* This should really be fixed in the kernel. */ eh.ether_type = buflen; #else === Hopefully with the new numbering scheme, we will have no more confusions of this sort! :) Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702210751.XAA02773>