Re: CVS commit: src/share/mk

2016-09-08 Thread Christos Zoulas
On Sep 8,  8:40pm, co...@sdf.org (co...@sdf.org) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/share/mk

| I think we need to revert this commit. I see issues with awk on pmax
| too.
| I don't have a nice hardfloat case like martin in PR 51026 but
| attempting to build anything from pkgsrc will fail on checksum compare.

Can you make a unit test?

christos


Re: CVS commit: src/share/mk

2016-09-08 Thread coypu
I think we need to revert this commit. I see issues with awk on pmax
too.

I don't have a nice hardfloat case like martin in PR 51026 but
attempting to build anything from pkgsrc will fail on checksum compare.

On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 08:32:12AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> Module Name:  src
> Committed By: christos
> Date: Sat Sep  3 12:32:12 UTC 2016
> 
> Modified Files:
>   src/share/mk: bsd.own.mk
> 
> Log Message:
> Switch mips32 to new binutils/gcc/gdb/pie. Tested with gxemul+pmax
> 
> 
> To generate a diff of this commit:
> cvs rdiff -u -r1.950 -r1.951 src/share/mk/bsd.own.mk
> 
> Please note that diffs are not public domain; they are subject to the
> copyright notices on the relevant files.
> 

> Modified files:
> 



re: CVS commit: src/sys/miscfs/specfs

2016-09-08 Thread Paul Goyette

On Thu, 8 Sep 2016, matthew green wrote:


"Paul Goyette" writes:

Module Name:src
Committed By:   pgoyette
Date:   Thu Sep  8 00:07:48 UTC 2016

Modified Files:
src/sys/miscfs/specfs: spec_vnops.c

Log Message:
if_config processing wants to auto-load modules named with an if_ prefix,
while specfc wants to auto-load modules without the prefix.  For modules
which can be loaded both ways (ie, if_tap and if_tun), provide a simple
conversion table for specfs so it can auto-load the if_ module.

This table should always be quite small, and the auto-load operation is
relatively infrequent, so the additional overhead of comparing names should
be tolerable.


would you mind reverting this and implementing the "dependant"
module model mlelstv proposed?

the above is a hack and doesn't scale or work if a new module
with the same "problem" is introduced, as it requires the base
kernel to be patched, where as a pair of modules can be added
much more easily.


Sure, I can do that.  Point well taken re requiring base kernel mods to 
add new table entries.


It will take me a couple of days to complete and test.  I've got a lot 
of issues dealing with my new machine...



+--+--++
| Paul Goyette | PGP Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses:  |
| (Retired)| FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | paul at whooppee.com   |
| Kernel Developer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoyette at netbsd.org |
+--+--++