On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 3:20 AM, Alan Barrett <a...@cequrux.com> wrote: > On Thu, 24 Dec 2009, Elad Efrat wrote: >> Modified Files: >> src/sys/secmodel/suser: secmodel_suser.c >> src/sys/sys: kauth.h >> >> Log Message: >> Rename KAUTH_GENERIC_CANSEE to KAUTH_GENERIC_UNUSED1 and remove handling for >> the former. > > Was this change reviewed? Searching recent email for > KAUTH_GENERIC_UNUSED1 returns no results for me.
That is because I didn't ask for it to be reviewed. >> enum { >> - KAUTH_GENERIC_CANSEE=1, >> - KAUTH_GENERIC_ISSUSER >> + KAUTH_GENERIC_UNUSED1=1, >> + KAUTH_GENERIC_ISSUSER, > > This change renumbers KAUTH_GENERIC_ISSUSER from 2 to 1. Was that > intentional? My C is rusty, if KAUTH_GENERIC_ISSUSER is 1, what is KAUTH_GENERIC_UNUSED1? vmware01$ cat enum.c #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/param.h> #include <sys/lwp.h> #include <sys/uio.h> #include <stdio.h> #include "/usr/netbsd/src/sys/sys/kauth.h" int main(void) { printf("KAUTH_GENERIC_UNUSED1 = %d\n", KAUTH_GENERIC_UNUSED1); printf("KAUTH_GENERIC_ISSUSER = %d\n", KAUTH_GENERIC_ISSUSER); return 0; } vmware01$ cc -Wall -o enum enum.c vmware01$ ./enum KAUTH_GENERIC_UNUSED1 = 1 KAUTH_GENERIC_ISSUSER = 2 vmware01$ -e.