Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!olivea!sgigate!sgi!igor!jbass From: jbass@igor.tamri.com (John Bass) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Subject: Re: 386BSD vs BSDI Message-ID: <1993Mar3.214122.20180@igor.tamri.com> Date: 3 Mar 93 21:41:22 GMT References: <1n0mgmINNjat@ftp.UU.NET> <1993Mar3.120727.11788@igor.tamri.com> <C3BsBv.2xHu@austin.ibm.com> Organization: DMS Design Lines: 22 In article <C3BsBv.2xHu@austin.ibm.com> guyd@austin.ibm.com (Guy Dawson) writes: [ list deleted ] > >If they are defined that I would argue that they are published since >the purpose of the header files in /usr/include and /usr/include/sys etc >is to publish APIs etc. .... some people would like to think so, but I disagree ... many vendors ended up with the following text in their header files (from SGI): /* Copyright (c) 1984 AT&T */ /* All Rights Reserved */ /* THIS IS UNPUBLISHED PROPRIETARY SOURCE CODE OF AT&T */ /* The copyright notice above does not evidence any */ /* actual or intended publication of such source code. */ in addition many of the fields and defines in the header files are strictly FYI since C lacks better data hiding abilities .... their mere existance in a header file does not include them in the API. John