On Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:42:17 pm Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > John, > > On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 02:47:52PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > J> On Tuesday, November 05, 2013 2:29:04 pm Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > J> > On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 11:56:09AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > J> > J> On Tuesday, November 05, 2013 5:29:48 am Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > J> > J> > Author: glebius > J> > J> > Date: Tue Nov 5 10:29:47 2013 > J> > J> > New Revision: 257696 > J> > J> > URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/257696 > J> > J> > > J> > J> > Log: > J> > J> > Drop support for historic ioctls and also undefine them, so that > code > J> > J> > that checks their presence via ifdef, won't use them. > J> > J> > J> > J> Most of these are COMPAT_43, but one appears to be a 9.x ioctl? If > that's the > J> > J> case it's implementation should probably stick around under > appropriate > J> > J> COMPAT_FREEBSD<x> macros. It looks like it goes all the way back to > 4.4BSD, > J> > J> so at least COMPAT_FREEBSD4 and later should define the > implementation to > J> > J> preserve ABI compat for old binaries. > J> > > J> > Why should we support such broken configurations as running new kernel > and > J> > ancient core base system utilities? The efforts to keep this are much > more > J> > expensive, then yields. > J> > J> Is this ioctl only ever used by ifconfig and not suitable for public > consumption? > J> If so, then I think removing it is fine. However, it's not clear that > this is > J> the case from the commit, and it's good to make sure it is really the case. > J> > J> It might be nice to hide ioctls we think are internal under some #ifdef > that tools > J> like ifconfig #define to expose them so we are more explicit about which > ioctls > J> are purely internal, etc. > > Well, it isn't hidden and actually some applications as zebra/quagga can use > it. > > On previous hacking session at this area, 2 years ago, I noticed that > zebra/quagga > do use SIOCAIFADDR and it actually does better at filling sockaddrs than our > ifconfig :) > > I am pretty sure that no closed source, but available to wide public, > application > that configures addresses in FreeBSD kernel exist. > > In case of open source applications, like zebra/quagga, supporting one major > release behind should be enough.
Mmmm, people run older versions of binaries (even open source ones) on newer OS's perhaps more often than you think. The COMPAT_43 stuff can be dropped certainly, but people will almost certainly do rolling upgrades where they upgrade the OS on their machines before they upgrade their packages. -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
