Re: betoh64

[Thomas Klausner <wiz@NetBSD.org>]

Hi Ingo!

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 01:56:49AM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Thomas Klausner wrote on Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 08:28:24PM +0100:
> > config.h just has
> > #if defined(__APPLE__)
> > # define htobe32(x) OSSwapHostToBigInt32(x)
> > # define betoh32(x) OSSwapBigToHostInt32(x)
> > # define htobe64(x) OSSwapHostToBigInt64(x)
> > # define betoh64(x) OSSwapBigToHostInt64(x)
> > #elif defined(__linux__)
> > # define betoh32(x) be32toh(x)
> > # define betoh64(x) be64toh(x)
> > #endif
> > 
> > and the Makefile assumes this macro must exist.
>
> That alone ought to be easy enough to fix.
> NetBSD certainly has some macros and functions
> to convert between network and host ordering
> and these just need to be plugged in.

I found, in sys/endian.h:

#define be16toh(x)      htobe16(x)
#define be32toh(x)      htobe32(x)
#define be64toh(x)      htobe64(x)
#define le16toh(x)      htole16(x)
#define le32toh(x)      htole32(x)
#define le64toh(x)      htole64(x)

so perhaps it's just a missing header after all.

> What else can we do?
> 
>  * Revert the sqlite3(1) stuff and move it to an experimental branch,
>    that way resynching to OpenBSD such that we can make a release
>    containing well-tested code?
> 
>  * Leave the sqlite3(1) stuff in as it is, hope that nobody
>    really relies on mandocdb(8) yet, make sure everything
>    except mandocdb(8) is well in sync with OpenBSD, and just
>    make a release anyway?

NetBSD's not using mdocml's apropos, but its own, so from my POV, even
the last option is fine.

> Given that NetBSD has mdocml in ports and not in base

That's not correct, NetBSD has mdocml in base even in NetBSD-6.
But we don't develop that version, we just import releases.

> a release
> is needed, directly synching with OpenBSD does not look viable.
> Relying on proper upstream releases is not even a bad idea when
> porting software.  (For OpenBSD, the situation is somewhat
> different because i do much of mandoc development in the OpenBSD
> tree, so it's not a port here but part of the base system.
> But that's not the case for NetBSD or FreeBSD.)
> 
> Just telling people to continue working with 1.12.1 is not an
> option either.  That's now more than a year old, lacking lots of
> bug fixes and -Tman is frankly unusable in that version.
> For a working -Tman, you really need OpenBSD -current or
> bsd.lv HEAD, so a release is definitely needed.

I'd definitely like to have a version with working -Tman... so I'd say
go for the version that can be achieved more quickly. :)
 Thomas
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv