From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Mar 17 01:43:28 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF95C1065676
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 01:43:28 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from weak.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4A748FC1C;
	Mon, 17 Mar 2008 01:43:27 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org)
Message-ID: <47DDCCC3.3020408@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 02:43:31 +0100
From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Macintosh/20080213)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
References: <47DBC800.8030601@dir.bg> <47DD1FFF.6070004@FreeBSD.org>
	<200803170043.m2H0h2qO010175@apollo.backplane.com>
In-Reply-To: <200803170043.m2H0h2qO010175@apollo.backplane.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Jordan Gordeev <jgordeev@dir.bg>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: vkernel & GSoC, some questions
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 01:43:28 -0000

Matthew Dillon wrote:
> :Finally, the way vkernels were implemented in dragonfly was *very* 
> :disruptive to the kernel source (lots of function renaming etc), so it 
> :is likely that this would also have to be completely reimplemented in a 
> :FreeBSD port.
> :...
> :Kris
> 
>     Well, I don't think I would agree with your assessment but,
>     particularly, the way vkernels are implemented in DragonFly is NOT
>     in the least disruptive to kernel source.

I was referring to the decision you made to rename all of the kernel 
functions that conflicted with libc functions so that vkernels could be 
linked against libc.

Kris