Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: STREAMS: interface versus implementation | Date | Tue, 15 Sep 1998 19:15:24 -0400 | From | Zack Weinberg <> |
| |
On Tue, 15 Sep 1998 23:51:07 +0100 (BST), Alan Cox wrote: >> That means implementing getpmsg() and putpmsg() which are recv() and send() >> only different. It also means faking the STREAMS ioctls and /dev entries: > >Please keep getpmsg/putmsg out of the generic glibc. Thats important because >otherwise glibc will break the syscall versions and calderas stuff
Uh oh. This only came up because the LiS people approached Ulrich about doing exactly that (well sort of). He referred them to me since I'd been looking at TLI.
glibc 2.1 has stubs for getpmsg/putpmsg (-ENOSYS always) and they have reserved syscall numbers in the devel kernel, so I thought there wouldn't be a problem with it. Can you explain what you're worried about, so I can give them a concrete reason to bug off?
zw
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |