Re: i386 and the COMPAT_50 option

[Andrew Doran <ad%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 11:02:40AM +0200, Antti Kantee wrote:

> Always include non-modularized compat by default, but flip the defs and
> provide NO_COMPAT for the people who must compile their own kernels and
> just can't live with compat compiled in.  That way the people who want
> to ultratweak can continue to do so, but we give a strong statement of
> what is considered default and don't have to maintain an evergrowing
> list of compat options in hundreds of config files.

I really like this. It has my vote.

I suggest that we also explicitly require native compat to be present for
emulations. This is already the case if you are using modules. At the moment
you can omit it, do a nice clean compile, and get code that's useless at
runtime.
 
> (fwiw, we really really should completely drop e.g. COMPAT_43 ioctls)

Isn't it likely that foreign binaries (Ultrix/SunOS) know about them?

Thanks,
Andrew