Re: 16bit ctype table

To: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>
Subject: Re: 16bit ctype table
From: Matt Thomas <matt%3am-software.com@localhost>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 13:18:30 -0700

On Sep 24, 2012, at 11:58 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 01:58:12AM +0000, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
>>>> how do you think about BUILDCOLD/_COMPAT_BSDCTYPE?
>>> 
>>> I don't think it helps that much, what to remove is documented.
>> 
>> as there are many changes waiting for the major bump, it's desirable
>> to make the work necessary on bump minimal.
> 
> Attached patch includes __BUILDCOLD define that can be used for other
> purposes in this area.

__BUILDOLDC might be better since __BUILDCOLD parses as __BUILD-COLD

Follow-Ups:
- Re: 16bit ctype table
  - From: Joerg Sonnenberger
- Re: 16bit ctype table
  - From: Edgar Fuß

References:
- Re: 16bit ctype table
  - From: Joerg Sonnenberger
- Re: 16bit ctype table
  - From: YAMAMOTO Takashi
- Re: 16bit ctype table
  - From: Joerg Sonnenberger

Prev by Date: Re: 16bit ctype table
Next by Date: Increasing FreeBSD compatibility in mtree
Previous by Thread: Re: 16bit ctype table
Next by Thread: Re: 16bit ctype table
Indexes:

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index