Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:13:13 +0200 From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, wollman@lcs.mit.edu, cvs-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/sys _exit.2 accept.2 access.2 acct.2 adjtime.2 aio_cancel.2 aio_error.2 aio_read.2 aio_return.2 aio_suspend.2 aio_waitcomplete.2 aio_write.2 bind.2 brk.2 chdir Message-ID: <20021220081313.GC70051@sunbay.com> In-Reply-To: <20021220.010540.103018236.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20021219095247.GA79372@sunbay.com> <20021219.211701.128866860.imp@bsdimp.com> <20021220080144.GB70051@sunbay.com> <20021220.010540.103018236.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--ncSAzJYg3Aa9+CRW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Dec 20, 2002 at 01:05:40AM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <20021220080144.GB70051@sunbay.com> > Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> writes: > : On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 09:17:01PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote: > : > In message: <20021219095247.GA79372@sunbay.com> > : > Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> writes: > : > : If the consensus is to refer to syscalls as functions, there > : > : is also no reason to keep section 2. > : >=20 > : > Actually, there is. System calls live in section 2, even if they > : > aren't called system calls. > : >=20 > : Not enough quoted context: > :=20 > : wollman> since the interfaces may move from one side of the boundary > : wollman> to the other. > :=20 > : If an interface moves from a syscall to a library call level, > : we should also move its manpage from section 2 to section 3. > : If we call syscalls just functions, there's not much point in > : keeping a separate section, as it would only give us an > : overhead of changing the manpage's section every time an > : interface moves. >=20 > I think that the overhead is worth it. We rarely move these things, > so optimizing for that case is less useful than knowing what's a > system call and what's a library call. >=20 > System calls live in section 2 and library calls live in section 3. > Even if we call them all functions, and have to move them around from > time to time, that's a good thing and something I would actively fight > against changing. >=20 Good. :-) Now, why wouldn't we call them system calls then if we know they are? Actually, there are a few manpages that describe both functions and syscalls. Look at the latest send(2) manpage for one example: : DESCRIPTION : The send() function, and sendto() and sendmsg() system calls are use= d to : transmit a message to another socket. There are also a few section 3 manpages that document syscalls, and I intend to fix this soon. Cheers, --=20 Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA, ru@sunbay.com Sunbay Software AG, ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer, +380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age --ncSAzJYg3Aa9+CRW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE+AtEZUkv4P6juNwoRAhNfAJ94rMWSQe54AX1ESI0WF0sk2FZWkACfWS7p eVhLkCbBKFoCuBzV8sUtB/I= =xEBL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ncSAzJYg3Aa9+CRW-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021220081313.GC70051>