Hey John do you want to land this or should I?

The commit log though can say "Remove pre-C99 support" though since the blocks are all for pre-C99.

This looks ok to me now.

Looks good to me.

Build Success

git rebase main

I'm not completely familar with FreeBSD's virtual memory system. But it seems the comment still doesn't match the code. Doesn't it return m_ret when the reclaim is successful and null when failed?

Removed redundant macros

Add __STDC_VERSION_STDBOOL_H__ as the header file now conforms C23.

Fix grammar in the commit message

Fixed by 5f757f3ff9144b609b3c433dfd370cc6bdc191ad and cb14a3fe5122c879eae1fb480ed7ce82a699ddb6

When will we merge the upstream llvm-project to freebsd-src? Are there any issues blocking the merge?

Fixed macro

@jrtc27 Can you review the changes?

D43545 takes care of this change. Should we close this?

Are there any more changes required?

Thanks for splitting this out.

Separate commit

Fixed typo in commit message

A nit on the description: "paremeter" should be "parameter"

Updated commit message

Remove cast to function pointer

qsort(tifiles, nifiles, sizeof (char *), strcompare); also works.

This kind of diff is way too big to review, it needs to be broken up. It's easy to mass rename like this but a lot harder to verify that you've actually done the right thing. The second file I picked to look at the diff at was clearly not correct (see the comment linked to this), so that doesn't bode well for the rest of the diff. Also some of the NIC drivers in the tree are really vendor imports, so any changes like this that get made to them should make their way upstream, otherwise there is a risk they got lost. I have not checked if that applies here or not.

In D43254#995739, @arichardson wrote:

Commit message should probably be qualified with "for kernel compilation"?

Reworded the commit message a little, but this was otherwise fine.

Commit message should probably be qualified with "for kernel compilation"?

This LGTM but the commit message should also include the minimum Clang+GCC versions

In D43641#995596, @minsoochoo0122_proton.me wrote:

Do I need to update the date of this man page?

Restored changes in usr.bin/lex

Do I need to update the date of this man page?

Move the definition of static_assert in <sys/systm.h>
Previous definition for linux compatibility is removed due to type definition conflict

I think this one is reasonable.

As per four reasons listed on arc@ I'm working on importing MIT KRB5 1.21.2.

Update

Remove man page for heimdal's gssapi

Restore libgssapi

In D43624#994816, @freebsd_igalic.co wrote:

not to be a total buzzkill, but, have you seen @cy's post on arch about this https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-arch/2023-December/000580.html