Garrett D'Amore writes: > > So, with the putback for 6711665 we have a small > > binary incompatibility. > > > Ouch. How much of a concern is this (for this particular case)?
Here's a way in which it's a concern: meem rightly notes that the macros are ancient in origin (with the UCB warning label on ioccom.h). It's likely that it's used widely even if not documented, and that there are hidden overflows everywhere. If anyone compiles a driver on an older Solaris release (say, S10) and then delivers that driver with a header file defining the ioctls it provides in terms of the system sys/ioccom.h (rather than just rolling its own macros), then the user is set up for a fall. If the user installs this package on OpenSolaris, and then attempts to write an application that uses the supplied ioctl, it will fail because the system ioctl macros are different, and now get a different answer with the same constants. I'm at the edge of taking back my suggestion for #2. Either #1 or doing something quite different (such as defining a new set of _NEWIO* macros) might be necessary. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list opensolaris-code@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
