On Oct 2, 2009, at 1:17 PM, Matthias Drochner wrote:
david%l8s.co.uk@localhost said:I which case another 4 bytes of pad would do no harm ??Would still be bad for COMPAT_NETBSD32.
Well, we could always add explicit padding and be compatible that way, which is an option OS/X didn't have (too late, at the time they did 64bit support).
However, it would screw up COMPAT_DARWIN use which would otherwise work, I suppose. Or COMPAT_SOLARIS for that matter? They do seem to be trying hard to maintain a consistent on-the-wire format, so I'm hesitant to just break that.
And now that I look at it, it does actually seem to do network byte order on the "wire", too.