From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 31 11:05:38 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 030C31065677; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:05:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from delphij@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pw0-f54.google.com (mail-pw0-f54.google.com [209.85.160.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDBBE8FC1B; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:05:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pwi9 with SMTP id 9so1006936pwi.13 for ; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 04:05:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=qEfyEXcJNr1CSv97B9XaLZqvseiZwNtBxdcdbRd22Jk=; b=ckeebakE4Ymrg6zxwqW8ssJUYj0sbrItucd403PHADqda+dJw6TMox+W2gmzQNfOiA IqvwMduZ5LkK2CjoX3OfsP1TnOPUem+hJuERwg7NW2jKWSq4g+RHvColkrJj3wubekbJ PEcfst2VbDFnN0bsJPTsx3JxC8dqq7hGPx4oE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=xVaMj1Y+eQYrVZd4hVJffYtkH6orgHVRb9EVsW8JaEpeMQS7OxtKd1HyVadWBOUVwQ OFVUdxlesGweh8S+yrfwI3zFFfFUrspvkbyZfkK03o0D/Ch/Z/sWxU9tZFMOFxUe5OEn HTCAzdCV+7YhC33HgCw4/0KNidOdeTrE5EmqE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.127.14 with HTTP; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 03:41:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.127.14 with HTTP; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 03:41:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4BACFE18.7010309@delphij.net> <86wrwylji0.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4BAD509B.3080805@delphij.net> <86ljdelhgd.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4BAD62CF.6090901@delphij.net> <868w9elego.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20100331102509.GI34892@gahrfit.gahr.ch> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 03:41:13 -0700 Received: by 10.141.89.14 with SMTP id r14mr2444093rvl.33.1270032073702; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 03:41:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: From: Xin LI To: gahr@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: d@delphij.net, the_paya@gentoo.org, ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Dag=2DErling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= , Alexander Logvinov Subject: Re: [RFC] Reduce namespace pollution on zlib.h X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:05:38 -0000 I will merge an upstream change from zlib, which basically unexpose LFS stuff on FreeBSD, and I plan to keep the off_t bits =3D=3D 64. However, I = would highly recommend ports maintainers to push upstream fix for LFS64 definitio= n removal since they are wrong on FreeBSD On Mar 31, 2010 3:30 AM, "Pietro Cerutti" wrote: On 2010-Mar-27, 02:51, Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav wrote: > Xin LI writes: > > So... ... Just to make it clear so that everyone knows how we're going to handle this: are you (src people) going to commit a fix to unexpose LFS crap or are we (ports people) supposed to fix each and every single port that supposes to be on Linux? The attentive reader will note a bias towards the former :) -- Pietro Cerutti The FreeBSD Project gahr@FreeBSD.org PGP Public Key: http://gahr.ch/pgp