> (er, other half of that int.)  Well, yeah...the simplest way to keep
> compatability seems to me to be to rename the ioctls.  For example, we
> now have
> 
> 	#define SIOCGIFFLAGS _IOWR('i', 17, struct ifreq)
> 
> so this proposal would do something like
> 
> 	#define OSIOCSIFFLAGS _IOW('i', 16, struct ifreq)
> 	#define SIOCSIFFLAGS  _IOW('i', 26, struct ifreq)
> 
> and have the OSIOCSIFFLAGS code do "ifr.ifr_flags = ifr.ifr_oflags" and
> then switch to SIOCSIFFLAGS.  (ifr_oflags would be a "compatability"
> short.)  OSIOCGIFFLAGS would of course do an SIOCGIFFLAGS and then
> "ifr.ifr_oflags = ifr.ifr_flags" before returning.  Do any other ioctls
> use ifr_flags?  I'd have to check....

Funny, this is almost exactly what i've already implemented, except
it's not nearly that difficult.


cgd