Matthew Dillon wrote:
:> 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
Huh. Well, that's about the last thing I would have thought would be
considered disruptive to the kernel source.
I don't think there's an issue that needs solving, GCC has -nostdlib and
-fno-builtin for precisely this reason.
Anyway, I agree that this is the least of someone's worries during a
hypothetical port of the dragonfly vkernel code. Just so everyone is
clear, the scope of such an effort would not be "port the code", it
would be "port the code and also finish it".
Kris
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
