On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:49, Carlos A. M. dos Santos wrote:
In Message-Id: <e71790db1003231749n5edf2cd2ubd39b74445297...@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 8:39 PM, jhell <jh...@dataix.net> wrote:
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 15:42, deischen@ 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
Ill say it again if I have to... COMPAT_ELF32 or possibly even ELF32_SUPPORT
seems to me as a very likely possibility.
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.
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"