From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.comstyle.com (speedy.comstyle.com [206.51.28.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23EC61A5B92 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2025 03:54:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=206.51.28.2 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749700455; cv=none; b=Jv2Gih+4IJIYreZN/gkfIqdhkIOz29VqfrjvRLzvPIB0opSDKyNirgJgx8wHCPxewccuePZOWy/6prwxomCqwVEZqO/51QxUwq8QIPpCQd6Tcd6dT3Wzq2hU5HLAlvzj1dPc2EyT/zps/gx8ccCki80YrCye9fKBJSlFYqmQRXk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749700455; c=relaxed/simple; bh=me6QaOoj0cLux/bFAu1x9f39a+h/mXvyzU4xkkiqjiQ=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Z/c64OWE8rhshw4ghrIq8QGnSCTlQW+PS+9dyBZZ1SCr0Yk0ao4jNP2SWSXqO/KcuccE4MoRiaf2VxsAmlSTfrCFvB0XBRm6ejNyFk5Wa1XgyD31LeHKu/rq9KZ1uvBFwVvF6LfCYWfNerkwLgL+BwqofW6B8fQCK2N5Lsz5Q/Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=comstyle.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=comstyle.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=comstyle.com header.i=@comstyle.com header.b=Dc8GmxT1; arc=none smtp.client-ip=206.51.28.2 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=comstyle.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=comstyle.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=comstyle.com header.i=@comstyle.com header.b="Dc8GmxT1" Received: from mail.comstyle.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.comstyle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4bHpYc70m4z8PbP; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 23:54:12 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=comstyle.com; h= message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references:from :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=me6QaOoj0cLux/bFAu1x9f39a+h/mXvyzU4xkkiqjiQ=; b=Dc8GmxT1JaPz rTRFuTAItlUYuxIKk8HLeril9B19cjTqufoAWiIAPtAFMUqNoe7cNAWr8KLEz4Id JcSUvzXsXUnPMyzsyqVFCuE9TXl/iXS3/oNNSjYjlWqvURlDMDnOcfGpSt31G7/r StP4TUgaGlQ00TjLGVIXhPwR2uOvSQ8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=comstyle.com; h=message-id :date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=U44 4NgkYsE6soDNN1yy3ngoweB8xHsvsx4srxSxBgK0IKoGvLk+9lF7sww1//826VNF zmqHHQK+CYj79ycjkAOLL5Keb1hlnbC3Ur94xvOqKxZ8AXTKXIZ5D2CSoUo8HH8p PXUqL/2yJrPNcq93fFXBsg7zZ3oJqA41huDdQ1Pw= Received: from [IPV6:2001:470:b050:6:142d:4b81:8fea:90b2] (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:b050:6:142d:4b81:8fea:90b2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: brad) by mail.comstyle.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4bHpYc6QnRz8PbN; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 23:54:12 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 23:54:11 -0400 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] config.mak.uname: update settings for FreeBSD To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org References: Content-Language: en-US From: Brad Smith In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2025-06-11 11:47 p.m., Junio C Hamano wrote: > Brad Smith writes: > >> FreeBSD 6.0 has memmem(). > And anything older than that no longer matters? I look at is as so. 6.0 is 19.5 years old as it is. > That may indeed be true (6.0 was from Nov 2005), but if that is the > reason why we simply lose NO_MEMMEM (instead of conditionally losing > for 6.0 and newer), that needs to be explained in the proposed log > message, together with the reason why we no longer do anything > special with version "4.x" (which could be "We ditch the support for > anything older than 6.0"). > > Assuming that our stance is "anything older than 6.0 no longer > matters", the patch itself looks good. This was my intent. I'll update the commit message.