Subject: Re: ancillary data alignment and binary backward compatibility
To: Chris G. Demetriou <email@example.com>
From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/09/2000 02:39:00
>That's one possibility, probably the most sane. (you don't want to
>change the existing value for the sparc, because of binary
>compatibility, and if sparc64's different, that's probably for a good reason.
>> I'm not sure if this is possible for the kernel side to dance like
>the kernel is just software.
we end up having two code for sys/netinet6 or sys/kern/uipc_socket.c,
is it really something what we want to do?