At 12:38 PM 3/12/2001 +0000, Ben Harris wrote:
>On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, IWAMOTO Toshihiro wrote:
>
> > As hpcarm is finally approaching to multiuser and it should use
> > sys/arch/hpc/hpc/disksubr.c, I'd like to move disksubr* references
> > in files.arm to files.arm26 and files.arm32.
> > (disksubr*.c will continue to stay under arch/arm/arm.)
>
>That seems like a reasonable idea to me.

Umm, then put sys/arch/hpc/hpc/disksubr.c is files.hpcarm and it will
override the disksubr.c in files.arm.  If you don't want any of the
disksubr.c in files.arm, can't you just put a !hpc on them?

> > Also, I'd like to change #ifdef __arm32__'s in
> > src/sbin/disklabel/disklabel.c to #ifdef FILECORE and define macros in
> > its Makefile based on ${MACHINE} value.
>
>Hrm.  This seems wrong to me (though so is leaving tests based on
>__arm32__).  We'd really like all binaries to be the same across ARM
>systems if at all possible.  Would it be feasible to switch at run-time?

This seems wrong to me as well.  The tests should be based on __arm__
and use the value of MACHINE to determine if the code should be used.
(Note that the shark and the netwinder don't need FILECORE support as well.)

> > Are there any problems or better idea?
>
>Well, I'd say that disklabel handling in NetBSD needs to be entirely
>reworked anyway, but I'm not volunteering to do it.

Agreed.
--
Matt Thomas               Internet:   matt@3am-software.com
3am Software Foundry      WWW URL:    http://www.3am-software.com/bio/matt/
Cupertino, CA             Disclaimer: I avow all knowledge of this message