* Matthew Emmerton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020609 19:21] wrote: > I' m working on getting OpenAFS working 100% on FreeBSD, and while reviewing > the first set of my patches with the OpenAFS maintainer, some questions > about kernel/userspace backwards compatibility came about. > > More specifically, OpenAFS was first ported on FreeBSD 4.2, and as a result, > all config files (autoconf and 3 static files) are configured to look for > FreeBSD 4.2. The CVS maintainer's current idea is is to duplicate all of > these config files and autconf logic for FreeBSD 4.[013456]. This will add > a bunch of _identical_ files to the CVS repo and add a whole lot of > unneccessary autoconf checks that IMHO, are unneeded. > > This begs the question, is a check for FreeBSD 4.x sufficient enough from a > userland perspective? What about from a kernel perspective (for kernel > modules)? From my observations (I compiled the userland on 4.[236] with no > problems), I think that a check for 4.x should be sufficient for userland > and kernel modules, but if any kernel hacking is involved (as is done in > net/arla), finer-grained checking will be required. Can anyone confirm or > deny this?
4.x should be pretty compatible with respect to 4.2 to 4.3 to 4.4 and so on, if you come across any jitter then you can probably use __FreeBSD_version from sys/param.h. -- -Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' Tax deductible donations for FreeBSD: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
