suggested patches for netinet6/

JINMEI Tatuya /神明達哉 jinmei at
Mon Apr 12 23:16:55 PDT 2004

>>>>> On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 07:56:38 -0700, 
>>>>> Luigi Rizzo <rizzo at> said:

>> > + is it ok to remove the __P() from the header files, ANSIfy
>> >   the function declarations and make them static as appropriate ?
>> >   Of course this ought to be done as a separate step.
>> I myself do not have a strong opinion on this.   However, these files
>> would also be shared with other BSDs via KAME snaps, and if this
>> change is not accepted by other BSDs, I'd like to keep it for future
>> synchronization between KAME and BSDs.

> ok, I am just unclear if we periodically import KAME sources in the
> tree and then reapply freebsd changes (trying to keep the latter
> as small as possible) or someone from time to time looks at
> relevant changes in the KAME tree and patches the freebsd version
> accordingly. In the latter case, ANSIfying the code would have little
> impact on the people porting back the patches, yet would help a lot
> in using stricter compiler checks.

Out of curiosity (as a novice compiler user), could you be more
specific on how it helps with stricter compiler checks to remove
__P()?  For example, what kind of checks does interfere with __P()?

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					jinmei at

More information about the freebsd-current mailing list