Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 21:56:33 +0200 From: Martin Faxer <gmh003532@brfmasthugget.se> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: David Greenman-Lawrence <dg@root.com>, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern uipc_syscalls.c Message-ID: <20020624195633.GC2134@lockdown.spectrum.fearmuffs.net> In-Reply-To: <20020624192716.108D9380E@overcee.wemm.org> References: <20020624180724.GB2134@lockdown.spectrum.fearmuffs.net> <20020624192716.108D9380E@overcee.wemm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2002.06.24 12:27:16 +0000, Peter Wemm wrote: > Martin Faxer wrote: > > i think you add a new syscall entity in syscalls.master for the new > > syscall (like nsendfile()) and then update libc to call that instead > > of the old syscall. > > > > then all old cold will still call osendfile() but code linked with a > > newer libc will call the new one. > > libc syscall stubs are auto-generated from the kernel syscall list. > Doing this would cause libc to have 'nsendfile' instead of 'sendfile'. > Of course, if you are prepared to add #define sendfile nsendfile in an > include file, then that works. ok, thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't exactly sure how that part worked. what actually prompted me to write the nsendfile() thing was that I quickly checked syscalls.master and saw entries for n[lf]stat(). upon checking more closely that might be something else though, and not related at all to "new" stat() functions, I'm not sure... so in this case, what is the correct procedure to follow ? do you add a new sendfile() entity to syscalls.master and mark the old one as "COMPAT" (will that "change" its name to osendfile() ?) or do you simply rename it (the old one) to osendfile() ? 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?20020624195633.GC2134>