From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Jun 15 6:18:17 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECF2337B429; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 06:18:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au) Received: from bde.zeta.org.au (bde.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.102]) by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26050; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 23:17:58 +1000 Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 23:16:12 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org To: Garrett Wollman Cc: msmith@FreeBSD.ORG, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sysorg: sys/modules In-Reply-To: <200106151216.IAA22612@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 15 Jun 2001, Garrett Wollman wrote: > In article <200106151055.f5FAtbm10056@mass.dis.org> you write: > > >This pushes us back to a single filename namespace, which is less than a > >wonderful idea. 8( It's good enough for libc.a, so it should be good enough for a small application like the kernel. > We're always going to have that so long as we continue to expect > static linkage to work. I don't see why. Linking together file.o and dir/file.o should work if there are no conflicts between their global symbols. The filename symbols are like local symbols and might cause complications for debugging, but so might ordinary local symbols with the same names. Different filenames might be needed for grouping object files into static libraries. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message