In message: <20090908162339.ga11...@cs.hut.fi> Antti Kantee <po...@cs.hut.fi> writes: : On Tue Sep 08 2009 at 12:18:57 -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote: : > | : No, __NetBSD__ is right. For all purposes, code in the rump kernel *is* : > | : NetBSD. E.g. if you have #ifdef __NetBSD__ in a kernel driver which : > | : was imported from $OtherOS, you must have the rump version think it is : > | : running on NetBSD, since it technically speaking is. The difference to : > | : most cpp symbols is merely that __NetBSD__ comes from the compiler instead : > | : of from the kernel headers. Of course param.h could define something like : > | : __I_am_the_NetBSD__ and we could test against that in all of our NetBSD : > | : kernel code, but I don't see any benefit, especially since __NetBSD__ : > | : is a well established practise even outside NetBSD developers. : > | : > | __NetBSD__ is the *COMPILER* environment. Depending on it is *BAD*. : > | You need to use a different symbol. This is a bug in the NetBSD code : > | now. __NetBSD__ isn't, and never has bene, the KERNEL. : > : > That was my complaint exactly. I meant to say this in my next message :-) : > : > | Maybe __NetBSD_Version__ should be used instead? Its clearly NetBSD : > | kernel build environment specific (since it comes from sys/parma.h) : > | and doesn't muddy the waters with the differences between the : > | different BUILD systems. : > : > That is what I was thinking also. : : Whoever finds this churn worth their effort, as dh pointed out, remember : to replace all instances of __FreeBSD__, __OpenBSD__, __Linux__, : __Slowaris__, __sMackOS__, __etc__ as well.
How many instances of those are there? And wouldn't it be spelled __linsux__? :) Warmer