On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:49, Carlos A. M. dos Santos wrote: In Message-Id: <e71790db1003231749n5edf2cd2ubd39b74445297c1e_at_mail.gmail.com> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 8:39 PM, jhell <jhell_at_dataix.net> wrote: >> >> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 15:42, deischen_at_ wrote: >>> >>> [ Some CC's stripped ] >>> >>> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, M. Warner Losh wrote: >>> >>>> P.S. I think that there's much traction to the idea of moving from >>>> COMPAT_FREEBSDx to some other variable called, for example, >>>> COMPAT_FREEBSD_BACK_TO=x, which will give compatibility for binaries >>>> as old as FreeBSD x.0, and have all the other magic handled behind the >>>> scenes. This would render the inconsistency with COMPAT_FREEBSDx part >>>> of the debate completely moot. >>> >>> Doesn't matter. We're still use to COMPAT_FREEBSDx since >>> it's been here so long. So regardless if you rename them >>> to COMPAT_FREEBSD_BACK_TO=x, it is still potentially confusing. >>> >>> COMPAT_ARCH32 and all other choices David mentions seem like >>> much better names - even if there wasn't any existing >>> COMPAT_FREEBSDx knobs. >>> >>> My $0.02. >>> >>> >> >> >> Ill say it again if I have to... COMPAT_ELF32 or possibly even ELF32_SUPPORT >> seems to me as a very likely possibility. >> >> Maybe even: >> SUPPORT_ELF32= # Support for 32 Bit ELF Binaries >> >> This would add its own name structure that is expandabe later-in-future when >> 128 Bit systems come out ;) > > ELF may go away sometime, just like a.out went to the holly pastures. > > Alright, that's like anything else in the world of computer sciences. But that still does not dismiss its purpose and right now ELF is in full swing and when the time comes... 10, 20, 30 years down the road then you simply add something else but by that point 32 bit computing will probably be history so there wont need to be any of this fuss for ELF or 32 bit support at that time. -- jhellReceived on Wed Mar 24 2010 - 00:09:09 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:02 UTC