On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 05:32:47PM +0100, Maxime Villard wrote:
> Le 19/12/2018 ?? 13:46, Maxime Villard a ??crit :
> > Le 18/12/2018 ?? 21:38, Christos Zoulas a ??crit :
> > > In article
> > > <CAMnsW54J8y8j2E7c=lxu0mklzeb5xpuyfszdo0ootarg8k+...@mail.gmail.com>,
> > > Jarom????r Dole?? ek <jaromir.dole...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Le mar. 18 d????c. 2018 ?? 13:16, Maxime Villard <m...@m00nbsd.net> a
> > > > ????crit :
> > > > > It is clear that COMPAT_SVR4 is completely buggy, but to be clear on
> > > > > the
> > > > > use of the code:
> > > >
> > > > +1 to removal for COMPAT_SVR4, there is always attic.
> > > >
> > > > I remember I've been also doing some mechanical changes in the area in
> > > > past, and also encountered things which were broken just by casual
> > > > browsing. Which I did not fix because I did not have "srv4" binary I
> > > > would need to run. It's simply not useful any more.
> > >
> > > Just remove it already :-) If we want it back we can resurrect it.
> > >
> > > christos
> >
> > so, I will remove
>
> Done.
>
> While I'm at it, there was a conversation about compat_ibcs2 [1]. See
> the thread, basically it is a compat for SVR3 on Vax. It seems that no
> one knew exactly what was the purpose of it.
It's misnamed ("IBCS2" stands for "Intel Binary Compatibility Standard"
and is a vestige of various early 286/386 System V ports not quite having
ABI compatibility). It is really the SVR3 compatibility code, period.
This has some value. Beyond its original purpose of running System V
binaries on x86, without it I think we may lose the ability to run
native-OS binaries for several platforms where the hardware vendors
added some System V syscalls to BSD kernels. I'd tread carefully here.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon t...@panix.com
"Whether or not there's hope for change is not the question. If you
want to be a free person, you don't stand up for human rights because
it will work, but because it is right." --Andrei Sakharov
