Its API in inherently non-threadsafe (and it depends on certain properties
of the underlying stdio implementation), so it shouldn't be a first-class
function for general use, polluting the application namespace.
Also remove the FLOCKFILE() code from it - this is under control of the
calling function now.
(XXX I'm not sure whether the FLOCKFILE() should be kept in fgetln(),
this function cannot be used in multiple threads anyway. It doesn't
hurt much, and it might prevent corruption of internal FILE structures.)
conflicts.
XXX: Fix the conflicts.
1. chio: change to 'x' from 'c' so that it does not conflict with cdio.
keep the 'c' ioctls in the driver for compat.
2. ppp/slip: change SLCGUNIT to some other number and accept the old number
in the driver.
3. ipf: [3 instances] Have darren fix them.
otherwise SADB_X_SPDDELETE2 and SADB_X_SPDFLUSH can free per-pcb policies
erroneously. it's the identical with what kame repository has.
ok'ed by itojun@
written to cover the 2-floppy case as well, so if this file is
updated later with delta's needed on netbsd-2-0, this one revision
does not need to be excluded.
ways of 386BSD, and one in stdlib, which is from Lite-2. The former was
picked up by the build process and has seen a little more maintenance
while the latter's location is "right", so bring the latter up to par
with the former and dispose of the (now) latter.
Reported by David A. Holland in PR lib/25160, which is worded in a
far less mind-boggling fashion than the above.
peer, we have to copy the "master" rate table to the faked-up node's
rate table, or else ath0 will complain, "ath0: bogus xmit rate
0x0". Thank you Konstantin KABASSANOV for reporting this problem.
peer, we have to copy the "master" rate table to the faked-up node's
rate table, or else ath0 will complain, "ath0: bogus xmit rate
0x0". Thank you Konstantin KABASSANOV for reporting this problem.
1. ifdef out the restriction that the SiS 900 has only one PHY
This is demonstrably false; the SiS 960 super south bridge in
PR 18590 has a SiS 900 rev 1 core in it.
2. bitbang the MII for all versions of the SiS 900; this is the
only way that the PHYs on this system answer.
Also, I suspect that SIS900_REV_960 constant in if_sipreg.h is
incorrectly labelled - there were later revisions of the super
south bridge (e.g. the 961, 962, and 963), and I suspect the
SiS 900 revision code there refers to one of those.
