lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jul]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: __KERNEL__ removal
Date
>Jeff Garzik
>If there -must- be parts of the kernel that are visible to userspace,
>yes, we should separate them and make that separation obvious. I would
>not call our current setup obvious :)


There are. -must-. Plan 9 minimizes them. It ain't POSIX, I'm guessing,
never having seen a POSIX in real life myself. I do happen to have K&R2
right here though. Hmmm, unistd.h is not in the 89 spec. Well of course
not. It's not C. You need need need that (which is why I did libsys.a),
and I think Plan 9 has a thing that lays out calling conventions for
syscalls, and some other things about the local CPU. Actually, Plan 9 lays
out lots of CPUs, being heterogenously distributed. That's where I get
dizzy, and start to wax unix-traditional. With all my twisted antics, I've
never cross-compiled anything. You also need ioctls for userland probably,
which Plan 9 either doesn't have or they actually figured out how to hide
them.

There's also a level below unistd.h maybe. A libcpu or something. Dono.

Rick Hohensee
www.clienux.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:57    [W:0.025 / U:0.960 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site