In article <711A9380-ED1C-11D7-957B-000A957020BC@3am-software.com>
matt@3am-software.com 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
tsutsui@ceres.dti.ne.jp