Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/sys/arch
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Izumi Tsutsui <email@example.com>
Date: 09/23/2003 02:29:35
In article <711A9380-ED1C-11D7-957B-000A957020BC@3am-software.com>
> I'd like to offer a contrary opinion. COMPAT_15 is harmless and
> people will wonder why we have COMPAT_1 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? :)