Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 14:23:47 -0700 (PDT) From: jdp@polstra.com To: hackers@freebsd.org Cc: rminnich@lanl.gov Subject: Re: anonymous memory map vs mmap on /dev/zero Message-ID: <200010052123.e95LNlC22460@vashon.polstra.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010041553430.6560-100000@mini.acl.lanl.gov> References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010041553430.6560-100000@mini.acl.lanl.gov>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010041553430.6560-100000@mini.acl.lanl.gov>, Ronald G Minnich <rminnich@lanl.gov> wrote: > On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, FengYue wrote: > > > It seems that mmap on /dev/zero is more portable. > > no really, It won't work at all correctly on linux, and on Tru64 it does > the totally wrong thing, but the (fd = -1, MAP_ANONYMOUS) does the right > thing on tru64. > > It's disappointing that this works so unportably :-( The other oddity about Tru64 is that a 0-length mmap of a 0-length file fails. John -- John Polstra jdp@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Disappointment is a good sign of basic intelligence." -- Chögyam Trungpa To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200010052123.e95LNlC22460>