hi,
the only use of COMPAT_43 (beside running 43 programs) is linux emulation layer
and some tty-related stuff. but GENERIC etc. still shouts KEEP THIS on this
option. is this necessary?
forcing COMPAT_43 pesimises performnce (additional locking in some places etc.)
and most users dont need it
Hi
I wrote a patch which removes dependancy on COMPAT_43 from linux abi simulator.
It introduces new option COMPAT_43FORLIN (name should be changed), ie. it
peels of the kernel all the unecessary stuff noone these days use while keeping
linux emulation working...
its kern/73165, pls take a look
On Sun, Aug 13, 2000 at 06:19:37PM +1000, Darren Reed wrote:
> > Darren Reed wrote:
> > >
> > > Is it meant to be possible to compile a kernel *without* COMPAT_43 ?
> > >
> > > Has anyone else tried this recently ?
> > >
> > > For m
In some mail from John Baldwin, sie said:
>
> Darren Reed wrote:
> >
> > Is it meant to be possible to compile a kernel *without* COMPAT_43 ?
> >
> > Has anyone else tried this recently ?
> >
> > For me, it seems to break the compile in (at least)
On Sun, 13 Aug 2000, John Baldwin wrote:
> Usually when testing a kernel compile, GENERIC is the kernel to test.
> If your changes are intrusive enough, you might also want to make sure
> that LINT builds ok. The LINT config file is generated from NOTES by
> typing 'make LINT' in /sys/i386/conf/
Darren Reed wrote:
>
> Is it meant to be possible to compile a kernel *without* COMPAT_43 ?
>
> Has anyone else tried this recently ?
>
> For me, it seems to break the compile in (at least) kern_sig.c
>From /sys/i386/conf/NOTES:
#
# Implement system calls compatible
Is it meant to be possible to compile a kernel *without* COMPAT_43 ?
Has anyone else tried this recently ?
For me, it seems to break the compile in (at least) kern_sig.c
Darren
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
7 matches
Mail list logo
