Hi Steve, * Steve Kargl <s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote: > I thought Christoph and bde were still hashing out the correctness > of this patch. > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-amd64/2009-April/012064.html
Yes, so I've only committed a subset of changes of which there were no major (or in my opinion valid) objections: - The construct that we use now works with many versions of GCC. There is absolutely no reason why we should still try to support GCC <2.95. - There was also the discussion about __inline vs inline and __volatile vs __volatile. As Christoph and I noticed, there is also a lot of inconsistency between the usage of the keywords in the current sources we have. I already spent much time discussing this issue with Christoph to get to at least some compromise. -- Ed Schouten <e...@80386.nl> WWW: http://80386.nl/
pgpsRd2Iw4N1U.pgp
Description: PGP signature
