Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 22:13:48 -0500 (EST) From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: getsysfd() patch #1 (Re: Virtual memory question) Message-ID: <200301230313.h0N3DmPP044886@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <20030123022158.E5F5B2A7EA@canning.wemm.org> References: <200301222323.h0MNN7co043532@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <20030123022158.E5F5B2A7EA@canning.wemm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 18:21:58 -0800, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> said: > Meanwhile, in the real world, it is exactly what we need at work. > Anonymous shared memory (MAP_ANON and /dev/zero) isn't good enough. I haven't seen anyone explain or back up this assertion. Tell me what the semantics are that you want, or give me the Message-ID where you posted them. What, precisely, are you trying to accomplish? > Actually, we dont care for the shm_open() API too much at all since it > conflicts with our application libraries. Too bad. It's been in POSIX or SSWG-RT for practically as long as your company has existed. -GAWollman To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200301230313.h0N3DmPP044886>