ovbcopy

[itojun%iijlab.net@localhost]

>>      it is really painful when you deal with shared code among *BSD.
>>      i'm going to add one soon...
>
>How about doing this: at the top of your own source files, do a
>conditional to define memmove as ovbcopy on FreeBSD and BSD/OS and
>use on memmove in the files?
>
>That will make it easier to deal with when they move to using mem*, as
>they probably will eventually.
>
>I would rather we not do a global ovbcopy macro.

        i don't understand.  then why do we have bcopy() macro in sys/systm.h?
        what is wrong in having both ovbcopy() and bcopy()?  if you remove
        bcopy macro right now, i can understand your tactics - but i would
        object to that as it will add lots of diffs in thirdparty kernel code.
        (the key to reduce thirdparty codebase synchronization labor is to
        try to reduce any diffs with the origin)

itojun