Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 17 Sep 1998 19:06:55 -0500 (CDT) | From | "Matthew G. Marsh" <> | Subject | Re: STREAMS: interface versus implementation |
| |
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 06:45:14 -0500 (CDT) > From: "Matthew G. Marsh" <mgm@paktronix.com> > > OK. I have been following this wondering if anyone remembers the thread > earlier in the spring/summer about the port of Novell Netware to Linux by > Caldera. Netware uses streams and unfortunately one of the engineers from > Caldera snitted about streams support in the kernel. Twas a bad spree. > > Again, though --- was that the low-level STREAMS interface, or the > higher-level TLI interface?
It was the entire LiS implementation. I just looked through the patch and it seems the putpmsg, getpmsg, poll syscalls are defined along with a whole pile of assembly code. I do not know the extant of the patching only that it was written specifically for 2.0.34 (and later 2.0.35). If I had to guess bearing on the way Netware works I would say they implemented both low-level STREAMS and TLI.
> > - Ted >
-------------------------------------------------- Matthew G. Marsh, President Paktronix Systems, LLC 1506 North 59th Street Omaha NE 68104 Phone: (402) 932-7250 Email: mgm@paktronix.com WWW: http://www.paktronix.com --------------------------------------------------
- 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/
| |