Re: CVS commit: src/external/cddl/osnet/dev/dtrace/i386
In article <20180604201246.24cf1f...@cvs.netbsd.org>, Robert Elz wrote: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >Module Name: src >Committed By: kre >Date: Mon Jun 4 20:12:46 UTC 2018 > >Modified Files: > src/external/cddl/osnet/dev/dtrace/i386: dtrace_subr.c > >Log Message: >The (dtrace version of) is needed for kthread_t >(same as the amd64 version). This should fix (one of) the >current i386 build breakages. That should come after ... In general "infrastructure" headers before "feature" headers... I will fix it (it happens to work, but)... christos
Re: CVS commit: src/external/cddl/osnet/dev/dtrace/i386
Date:Mon, 4 Jun 2018 21:31:34 + (UTC)
From:chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas)
Message-ID:
| That should come after ... In general "infrastructure"
| headers before "feature" headers... I will fix it (it happens to work,
| but)...
Yes, that's what I would have thought but I just copied the position in
the amd64 version of the file.
I see you changed this - it would be a good idea to make the same
change in the amd64 version, and avoid yet another meaningless
difference between the two.
For this (and an earlier, that someone else fixed) of the recent build
failures, I have been looking at the i386 vs amd64 versions of the
"same" files (not dtrace/cddl, I don't much care about that, but regular
src/sys/arch/{amd64,i386}) - obviously there are differences because
they are not the same architecture, but there are lots of other differences
that seem completely pointless (eg: in one file, in both versions, there is
a comment, where the wording is identical, but one of them ends with a
period (full stop) and the other does not ... a completely pointless
difference that makes looking to see what is actually different between
the two much harder.
There are a whole lot more.
kre
Re: CVS commit: src/external/cddl/osnet/dev/dtrace/i386
On Jun 5, 8:10am, k...@munnari.oz.au (Robert Elz) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/external/cddl/osnet/dev/dtrace/i386
| Yes, that's what I would have thought but I just copied the position in
| the amd64 version of the file.
It is unfortunate that the files have diverged unnecessarly. Perhaps we
should fix that and push the changes upstream.
| I see you changed this - it would be a good idea to make the same
| change in the amd64 version, and avoid yet another meaningless
| difference between the two.
Yes, I don't want to keep adding to each architecture that
includes that dtrace header file :-)
| For this (and an earlier, that someone else fixed) of the recent build
| failures, I have been looking at the i386 vs amd64 versions of the
| "same" files (not dtrace/cddl, I don't much care about that, but regular
| src/sys/arch/{amd64,i386}) - obviously there are differences because
| they are not the same architecture, but there are lots of other differences
| that seem completely pointless (eg: in one file, in both versions, there is
| a comment, where the wording is identical, but one of them ends with a
| period (full stop) and the other does not ... a completely pointless
| difference that makes looking to see what is actually different between
| the two much harder.
|
| There are a whole lot more.
Sigh...
christos
Re: CVS commit: src/external/cddl/osnet/dev/dtrace/i386
Date:Mon, 4 Jun 2018 21:13:23 -0400 From:chris...@zoulas.com (Christos Zoulas) Message-ID: <20180605011323.e275017f...@rebar.astron.com> | It is unfortunate that the files have diverged unnecessarly. Perhaps we | should fix that and push the changes upstream. I had assumed that src/external/cddl/osnet/dist was upstream and the rest (src/external/cddl/osnet/*) was the local glue. | Yes, I don't want to keep adding to each architecture that | includes that dtrace header file :-) With that change the include of can probably just be deleted from the amd64 version of dtrace_subr.c - but I have not tested that. | Sigh... Yes.I might clean up some of it. kre
re: CVS commit: src/external/cddl/osnet/dev/dtrace/i386
> | Sigh... > > Yes.I might clean up some of it. please do :-)
