On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 6:24 PM, M. Warner Losh <imp_at_bsdimp.com> wrote: > In message: <7d6fde3d1003111720g7dccf93w1f51db88758a5c4d_at_mail.gmail.com> > Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd_at_gmail.com> writes: > : On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Scot Hetzel <swhetzel_at_gmail.com> wrote: > : > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Mike Jakubik > : > <mike.jakubik_at_intertainservices.com> wrote: > : >> On 3/11/2010 9:50 AM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > : >>> > : >>> As a result of importing 32-bit compatibility support for non-x86 64-bit > : >>> platforms, the kernel options COMPAT_IA32 has been renamed COMPAT_FREEBSD32 > : >>> in revision 205014, so all kernel configurations including this option must > : >>> be modified accordingly. > : >>> > : >> > : >> That sounds a bit confusing, compatibility with FreeBSD 3.2? > : >> > : > I agree that the name COMPAT_FREEBSD32 is confusing, does it mean > : > compatiblity with FreeBSD 3.2, FreeBSD 32 or 32-bit ARCH's. > : > > : > A better name would have been COMPAT_ARCH32 or COMPAT_32BIT_ARCH. > : > : Agreed. Is it possible to change the name again because it really > : hasn't gotten much traction yet? > > What does the name matter, really? > > This will be documented, and mirrors the kernel source > compat/freebsd32. > > Put another way: if everybody that's going to comment on the name > would instead fix one bug from the PR database with the time they > spend commenting on it, would FreeBSD be better or worse off than > spending dozens of hours arguing over COMPAT_X32 vs COMPAT_Y32 vs > COMPAT_FLYING_MONKEYS? I can haz PR review then? Here's an easy one :)... http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=144644 Thanks, -GarrettReceived on Fri Mar 12 2010 - 03:24:58 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:01 UTC