Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:09:38 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> To: Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: System headers with clang? Message-ID: <4E94E8D2.8010502@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CACqU3MVbVze0ejRqeoDANeREcWNhxQguOkyLU1V26AWT_2SqkA@mail.gmail.com> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1110091229550.43656@lrosenman.dyndns.org> <4E942FF1.9000805@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1110110830200.21480@lrosenman.dyndns.org> <4E9449F2.2000801@FreeBSD.org> <4E944BA5.4080506@lerctr.org> <83FC19FA-BD52-4383-9ABE-708161597B85@mac.com> <589d032a-7b71-4ff1-8adf-f5e49e87696c@email.android.com> <CACM2%2B-5ne78pQ0xbbomsJvbw27KsiVN4D66ie-admpQhBg7LPA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1110111253440.62331@lrosenman.dyndns.org> <CAGH67wTpZ-HW7ogTWzhxV9XROkxLD_vCMGemc%2B9sOp%2B%2B1H3-gg@mail.gmail.com> <CADL2u4i1jPMGR0deh8TVqudoBQ4scqFoYazepR5s4DKchyQU2A@mail.gmail.com> <CACqU3MXeC1u1PsD4Dyx5RR3%2BAdSNE6hPuyZ599JiBx7ppcqOjg@mail.gmail.com> <4E949C26.4070105@freebsd.org> <CACqU3MVbVze0ejRqeoDANeREcWNhxQguOkyLU1V26AWT_2SqkA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/11/11 12:57 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Julian Elischer<julian@freebsd.org> wrote: >> On 10/11/11 12:36 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: >>>> [...] >>> libprocstat is _itself_ a problem: >>> >>> % git grep 'define _KERNEL' . >>> [...] >>> lib/libprocstat/cd9660.c:#define _KERNEL >>> lib/libprocstat/nwfs.c:#define _KERNEL >>> lib/libprocstat/smbfs.c:#define _KERNEL >>> lib/libprocstat/udf.c:#define _KERNEL >>> lib/libprocstat/zfs.c:#define _KERNEL >>> [...] >>> >>> ok, I admit this is all FS related stuff :) >> but at least it comes with the system so it matches. >> > no, you should be able to run a FreeBSD 1.0 userland and a 9-RELEASE > kernel together and have all utilities working. If not, you cannot > claim to support backward compatibility, even if you do on a subset of > kernel/userland interface. That said, this is just my personal > opinion. > >> we've been looking for the 'right' way to do this since, hmmm, 1988 that I >> remember and I bet before that too. >> > then the job was done bad. I didn't say we DID it I said we've been looking for the right answer. libkvm was a small step... you really don't want to know what was done before that. I've run FreeBSD 1.1 on a freeBSD 8 jail so I know what you mean, you have to put some things like 'ps' and ifconfig, and 'netstat' into it (statically compiled) or you can't get anywhere but even if there was a differnt interface, the likelyhood of it still being valid after 19 years pretty small. > I will repeat myself here, but I ran what-was-to-become-Linux-v3.2 > kernel on a 4 years old openwrt image and still had a functional > system. Comparatively, I could not mix FreeBSD 7-STABLE userland and > 8-STABLE kernel, The 8-STABLE kernel even changed the FS enough to > make FreeBSD 7 unable to boot (even single user). actually due to libkvm there are actually a lot of programs that will work over the 7-8 boundary... a lot more than used to. between, say 2 and 3. > Let me emphasize again that it is only my personal opinion :-) Yep but its shared.. Unfortunately the problem is actually trickier than first appears. My own attempt at it can be seen with netgraph, where we instituted a text based config scheme, and in geom where PHK made an XML config scheme. > - Arnaud >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E94E8D2.8010502>