From owner-freebsd-emulation Sun Jan 10 02:56:36 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA01843 for freebsd-emulation-outgoing; Sun, 10 Jan 1999 02:56:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (castles333.castles.com [208.214.167.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA01838 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 1999 02:56:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA05296; Sun, 10 Jan 1999 02:52:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199901101052.CAA05296@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Marcel Moolenaar cc: Mike Smith , Brian Feldman , freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sendmsg() not working?! In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 10 Jan 1999 11:35:39 +0100." <3698827B.BBEB4CF3@scc.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 02:52:50 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > Just one question. Is it save to assume there is no problem with the native > FreeBSD syscall? > To put it differently; Is it wise to focus on the subtle differences of the > Linux syscall? I would definitely want to set up a FreeBSD version of the call under the same circumstances (ie. test program) to make sure it worked natively, then build the same test program under Linux and verify that it failed under emulation, and then compare the call data inside the kernel for the two operations. -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-emulation" in the body of the message