Maxim Sobolev wrote:
> > > There is no much point in this patch, because it will increase size of
> > > struct ifreq, which means that no ioctl's from older apps will be accept
ed
> > > anyway. Therefore, there is no difference between those two, while my
> > > approach is obviously cleaner.
> >
> > It does not increase size of struct ifreq.
> > This is a union not a struct as You see.
>
> Oh, yes, you are obviously correct. However, I still wonder if your patch
> is endianless-safe.
FWIW, for 4.x, endianness is not a problem since all the 4.x platforms
are little-endian. For 5.x we should make a clean break.
Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
