In D52769#1205728, @maxim wrote:

OK, I see. Do you want me to commit it for you?

OK, I see. Do you want me to commit it for you?

I cannot make git push, get access error:

Please re-arrange the calendar entry in calendar (zic!) order and feel free to commit.

Closed by https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/pull/1811

I went ahead and landed this since it won't hurt and may help.

In D51463#1175419, @tembun_bk.ru wrote:

In D51463#1175391, @bapt wrote:

note that it is not necessary anymore to add/update this in termcap, since the last work on ncurses, terminfo installed in localbase takes precedence over termcap, so if you install the right terminfo via the sterm package then it will just work without conversion to termcap, which was the point of doing that.
see what the x11/foot package is doing.

Oh, thanks, I didn't know that. I tried it now and it indeed works.

But I guess it still would be a good idea to make termcap entries for st up-to-date with 0.9.2, since we already have them for 0.8.

agreed

In D51463#1175391, @bapt wrote:

note that it is not necessary anymore to add/update this in termcap, since the last work on ncurses, terminfo installed in localbase takes precedence over termcap, so if you install the right terminfo via the sterm package then it will just work without conversion to termcap, which was the point of doing that.
see what the x11/foot package is doing.

note that it is not necessary anymore to add/update this in termcap, since the last work on ncurses, terminfo installed in localbase takes precedence over termcap, so if you install the right terminfo via the sterm package then it will just work without conversion to termcap, which was the point of doing that.
see what the x11/foot package is doing.

In D51463#1175237, @markj wrote:

This looks fine to me. I guess it was generated with infotocap st.info from https://git.suckless.org/st/file/st.info.html?

This looks fine to me. I guess it was generated with infotocap st.info from https://git.suckless.org/st/file/st.info.html?

These seem sane to me... Added bapt@ since he's been doing the terminal stuff lately.

MIT krb5 has been adopted in CURRENT.

MIT krb5 has been adopted in CURRENT.

In D43239#1108863, @imp wrote:

In D43239#1108862, @jhb wrote:

So the one failure in the exp-run is apparently we have a port that builds the FreeBSD libusb for Linux using /compat/linux/bin/gcc and that version of GCC is too old to support c17.

So do we care? And is it too old to support gnu11? There's no material difference between the two that affects us, right? Could that port not use tgat, assuming upgrading to a newer gcc isn't possible...

In D43239#1108862, @jhb wrote:

So the one failure in the exp-run is apparently we have a port that builds the FreeBSD libusb for Linux using /compat/linux/bin/gcc and that version of GCC is too old to support c17.

So the one failure in the exp-run is apparently we have a port that builds the FreeBSD libusb for Linux using /compat/linux/bin/gcc and that version of GCC is too old to support c17.

I've created a PR to do an exp-run both this and D43237 at https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=284039

Fix double empty lines. make buildword success

Remove CSTD= c99 from openzfs

Turned out that FreeBSD uses c99 while the upstream uses gnu99. I think it is safe to go for gnu17.

Restore sys/conf/kern.mk
Build success on amd64

In D43237#1103957, @minsoochoo0122_proton.me wrote:

In D43237#1103894, @jhb wrote:

Also, the only contrib things I could find that are using c99 explicitly is ZFS. I wonder if those can use c17?

OpenZFS seems to use gnu99 (source code). I don't think it is necessary, but if it is, it can be done in a separate commit/revision.

In D43237#1103894, @jhb wrote:

Also, the only contrib things I could find that are using c99 explicitly is ZFS. I wonder if those can use c17?

Testing locally I found that I did not need the changes to linuxkpi, I only needed the zstd change. For that, I also made the header include <sys/kassert.h> rather than <sys/systm.h> as we define all the assertion macros for the kernel in <sys/kassert.h>.

Also, the only contrib things I could find that are using c99 explicitly is ZFS. I wonder if those can use c17?

I'm working on trying to merge this and have the following candidate commit message:

Individual revisions splited from b662ca1d6cd82044c6cb79075e1830b97594bef3 are also on Github. D43236, D43237, and D43239

In D43239#1101984, @jhb wrote:

Do you have a branch pushed somewhere with these commits split out already?

Do you have a branch pushed somewhere with these commits split out already?

Fix indent