Re: API/ABI rank of headers in /usr/include/isofs/cd9660

["Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup%gmx.net@localhost>]

Hi,

[skipping CVS discussion aspects]

matthew green:
> all we have to do is, like this case, simply not install them.

But i had to learn that this would break fstat(1) and pmap(1).
So i do not dare to uphold my proposal to remove the semi-private
header files.


In the other thread about the particular changes for large
file support in cd9660, the opinion seems to be that both programs
and any alikes (lsof ?) get no warranty of API stability with
these headers.

Nevertheless, nobody stated that a tiny increase in the memory
consumption of a vnode would be a problem. (I already had to go
half the way to ensure ABI compatibility.)

In this case i can keep up API/ABI compatibility for quite a low
price. Old includers will of course only see the first file section,
unless they enhance their API usage to the new capabilities. But
nothing will break or be worse than before the change.

So currently, i am testing this variant.
(I will be ready to follow any decision, if stronger opinions
 appear.)


Have a nice day :)

Thomas