Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

Date:Sat, 25 Feb 2017 18:13:34 +1100 From:matthew green Message-ID: <14043.1488006...@splode.eterna.com.au> | there's a rough ability to "guess" you have a matching kernel/kmem | groveller based upon the version. eg, crash(8) will notice a

re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

> I'm evaluating it from the osabi (pkgsrc term) point of view. I'm > targeting LLDB for 7.99.62+. If the kernel bump approach is reserved for > loadable kernel modules, I will follow this in future changes. it's about whether code is expected to work in that kernel environment or not. it's not

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

Date:Fri, 24 Feb 2017 19:24:34 +0800 (PHT) From:Paul Goyette Message-ID: | In many cases, one might just "ride the previous bump" Yes, I've seen that happen several times, but it would be

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

On Fri, 24 Feb 2017, Robert Elz wrote: Date:Fri, 24 Feb 2017 09:04:36 +0100 From:Martin Husemann Message-ID: <20170224080436.gb1...@mail.duskware.de> | (and we already had a bump just a few hours earlier). It would indeed be useful if, when a

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

Date:Fri, 24 Feb 2017 09:04:36 +0100 From:Martin Husemann Message-ID: <20170224080436.gb1...@mail.duskware.de> | (and we already had a bump just a few hours earlier). It would indeed be useful if, when a change that requires a kernel version

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 11:57:36PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > My bump was still legitimate as I changed size of amd64 and i386 struct > lwp - I removed one MD field. Yeah, that is all fine. I was just confused because the specific commit did not seem to want a bump, and while numbers are

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

Date:Thu, 23 Feb 2017 23:57:36 +0100 From:Kamil Rytarowski Message-ID: | My bump was still legitimate as I changed size of amd64 and i386 struct | lwp - I removed one MD field. Yes, I agree, and said

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

On 23.02.2017 09:48, Robert Elz wrote: > Date:Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:32:16 +0800 (PHT) > From:Paul Goyette > Message-ID: > > | On Thu, 23 Feb 2017, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > | > | > I'm

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

Date:Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:32:16 +0800 (PHT) From:Paul Goyette Message-ID: | On Thu, 23 Feb 2017, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: | | > I'm evaluating it from the osabi (pkgsrc term) point of

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

On 23.02.2017 08:32, Paul Goyette wrote: > On Thu, 23 Feb 2017, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > >> I'm evaluating it from the osabi (pkgsrc term) point of view. I'm >> targeting LLDB for 7.99.62+. If the kernel bump approach is reserved for >> loadable kernel modules, I will follow this in future

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

On Thu, 23 Feb 2017, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: I'm evaluating it from the osabi (pkgsrc term) point of view. I'm targeting LLDB for 7.99.62+. If the kernel bump approach is reserved for loadable kernel modules, I will follow this in future changes. Modules (and specifically, their interfaces to

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

On 23.02.2017 07:23, Robert Elz wrote: > Date:Thu, 23 Feb 2017 05:29:41 + > From:Martin Husemann > Message-ID: <20170223052941.ga29...@homeworld.netbsd.org> > > | Does this kind of change really require a version bump? > > That one didn't,

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

Date:Thu, 23 Feb 2017 05:29:41 + From:Martin Husemann Message-ID: <20170223052941.ga29...@homeworld.netbsd.org> | Does this kind of change really require a version bump? That one didn't, but there was another checkin, 5 or 6 mins earlier,

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/sys

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 03:48:20AM +, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > Module Name: src > Committed By: kamil > Date: Thu Feb 23 03:48:20 UTC 2017 > > Modified Files: > src/sys/sys: param.h > > Log Message: > Welcome to 7.99.62! > > New ptrace(2) operations: > - PT_RESUME > -