COMPAT_43 tty processing ?

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <200406241859.54810.peter at wemm.org>, Peter Wemm writes:
>On Wednesday 23 June 2004 04:27 pm, David Schultz wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 21, 2004, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> > Do we need the COMPAT_43 tty processing in 5-STABLE ?
>>
>> FWIW, I used to run with COMPAT_43 disabled entirely.  I think the
>> only breakage I noticed was that the Linuxolator didn't work
>> anymore because of a number of `#ifdef COMPAT_43's in the socket
>> code that linux.ko depends on.
>
>These should probably be broken out as COMPAT_OLDSOCK, whih is implied 
>by the linuxulator or COMPAT_43 or the like.

Or better yet: made unncessary in the linuxolator ?

>These days we could probably just kill it entirely and replace it with a 
>short recipe for converting code.    eg: list what the new names for 
>the flags and modes are.  Most programs do little more than either run 
>in the default line processing mode, or drop into raw mode via 
>cfmakeraw() and friends, possibly with a couple of tweaks to the 
>generated termios settings.
>
>No, I'm not volunteering to extract this code of a QIC 6150 tape that I 
>have with it on. I'd sooner help delete it from src/sys than revive 
>that monster. :-)

I've asked our ports-meister to run a build without the COMPAT_43 tty
code and the ports crew to get rid of -lcompat in the ports to the
extent possible and I fully expect COMPAT_43 tty processing to not
be in 5-STABLE.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.