On Thursday, November 17, 2011 2:02:02 pm Robert Millan wrote: > 2011/11/17 John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org>: > > I recall the discussion from earlier. I can't recall if I had replied to it > > though. :-/ In my current opinion, I think it would be fine to define > > __FreeBSD_kernel__ on FreeBSD and to do it in <sys/param.h> for now until > > all > > the compilers we use have been updated to define it automatically (which may > > be a long time). I think it will also be fine to patch in-system headers to > > use __FreeBSD_kernel__ once <sys/param.h> is defined. Unfortunately headers > > in 3rd party software are going to have to check for both __FreeBSD__ and > > __FreeBSD_kernel__ to support both GNU/kFreeBSD and older FreeBSD for the > > foreseeable future. I think that is fine, but that the sooner we add > > __FreeBSD_kernel__ on FreeBSD the sooner we get the clock started for a day > > when those extra checks can go away. I would also be fine with MFC'ing the > > addition of __FreeBSD_kernel__ to older branches (at least 7 - 9) as well. > > Well, here's a patch then. I wrote a comment in it trying to explain > the situation. Please let me know what you think.
Hmm, I wonder if it's better to use the #ifndef approach rather than #undef so that when compilers are updated to DTRT we will honor their settings? (And eventually this could be maybe removed from param.h altogether.) -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
