Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/sys/arch
To: None <>
From: Izumi Tsutsui <>
List: source-changes
Date: 09/23/2003 02:29:35
In article <> wrote:

> I'd like to offer a contrary opinion.  COMPAT_15 is harmless and
> people will wonder why we have COMPAT_1[12346] but not COMPAT_15 and
> probably add it for consistency.

IMHO, we can note which compatibility is provided by each COMPAT_XX options
and it's enough.

> This also brings up a secondary issue.  Should COMPAT_16 really be
> COMPAT_15?  Don't you need to COMPAT_16 run signaling NetBSD 1.5
> programs?  If so, it's really COMPAT_15. :)

I think COPMAT_XY provides "compatibility with X.Y and prior."
(Isn't COMPAT_09 also required for 0.8 and 386BSD binaries? :)
Izumi Tsutsui