Re: Correct size of kinfo_proc
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Maxim Sobolev writes: Well, we are now well informed about this, could we just fix sys/sys/user.h to match relity (credit goes to phk for broking it and ignoring my posts completely)? I've been kind of waiting for -current to actually work again. I hate commiting to -current when it's börked. Yes, fix it in sys/user.h for now, or better, do the right thing ^ wrong with version numbers. Version numbers would be essentially a regression to the way of doing things before Kirk's changes. The size of the struct used to work almost perfectly as a version number in practice, because changes almost always bloat things. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Correct size of kinfo_proc
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Maxim Sobolev writes: Warner Losh wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Igor Robul writes: : On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 03:00:48PM +0200, Maxim Sobolev wrote: : Hi Poul, : : In revision 1.31 of src/sys/sys/user.h you have added new ki_layout field to : kinfo_proc structure, but forgot to increase KINFO_PROC_SIZE from 644 to 648. : Please correct. : Why don't use sizeof() insead of hardcoding numbers? Because KINFO_PROC_SIZE is part of the ABI. Changes to its size are always wrong, in that they break the ABI. The checks are there to tell us when the ABI has been broken. Well, we are now well informed about this, could we just fix sys/sys/user.h to match relity (credit goes to phk for broking it and ignoring my posts completely)? I've been kind of waiting for -current to actually work again. I hate commiting to -current when it's börked. Yes, fix it in sys/user.h for now, or better, do the right thing with version numbers. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Correct size of kinfo_proc
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Maxim Sobolev writes: Warner Losh wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Igor Robul writes: : On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 03:00:48PM +0200, Maxim Sobolev wrote: : Hi Poul, : : In revision 1.31 of src/sys/sys/user.h you have added new ki_layout field to : kinfo_proc structure, but forgot to increase KINFO_PROC_SIZE from 644 to 648. : Please correct. : Why don't use sizeof() insead of hardcoding numbers? Because KINFO_PROC_SIZE is part of the ABI. Changes to its size are always wrong, in that they break the ABI. The checks are there to tell us when the ABI has been broken. Well, we are now well informed about this, could we just fix sys/sys/user.h to match relity (credit goes to phk for broking it and ignoring my posts completely)? I've been kind of waiting for -current to actually work again. I hate commiting to -current when it's bÆrked. Yes, fix it in sys/user.h for now, or better, do the right thing with version numbers. Ah ok if so, I though that you just forgot about it. I think it would be wise for me to avoid hacking this part, especially considering that the only harm from this is warning message at bootup. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Correct size of kinfo_proc
On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 03:00:48PM +0200, Maxim Sobolev wrote: Hi Poul, In revision 1.31 of src/sys/sys/user.h you have added new ki_layout field to kinfo_proc structure, but forgot to increase KINFO_PROC_SIZE from 644 to 648. Please correct. Why don't use sizeof() insead of hardcoding numbers? -- Igor Robul, Unix System Administrator Programmer @ sanatorium "Raduga", Sochi, Russia http://www.brainbench.com/transcript.jsp?pid=304744 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Correct size of kinfo_proc
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Igor Robul wrote: On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 03:00:48PM +0200, Maxim Sobolev wrote: Hi Poul, In revision 1.31 of src/sys/sys/user.h you have added new ki_layout field to kinfo_proc structure, but forgot to increase KINFO_PROC_SIZE from 644 to 648. Please correct. Why don't use sizeof() insead of hardcoding numbers? because we don't want the size of the struct. We want the size that the should have. It must be a constant for binary compatibility. This is a small part of binary compatibility, but good enough to inhibit adding new fields in the middle. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Correct size of kinfo_proc
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Igor Robul writes: : On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 03:00:48PM +0200, Maxim Sobolev wrote: : Hi Poul, : : In revision 1.31 of src/sys/sys/user.h you have added new ki_layout field to : kinfo_proc structure, but forgot to increase KINFO_PROC_SIZE from 644 to 648. : Please correct. : Why don't use sizeof() insead of hardcoding numbers? Because KINFO_PROC_SIZE is part of the ABI. Changes to its size are always wrong, in that they break the ABI. The checks are there to tell us when the ABI has been broken. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
