On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 12:49:32PM -0600, Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 10:35:27AM -0800, Jason Evans wrote:
> > The naming
> > approach I'm taking is:
> >
> > fwrite() <-- Alternate entry point that is used externally unless
> >another library ove
On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 10:35:27AM -0800, Jason Evans wrote:
> I'm working on adding alternate entry points to libc now.
Good.
> The naming
> approach I'm taking is:
>
> fwrite() <-- Alternate entry point that is used externally unless
>another library overrides it.
>
On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 06:42:56AM -0600, Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
> It's my impression that glibc uses a three (four?) tiered naming
> convention. The "pure" syscall (in our case, eg. _write()). Then
> there is the version used internally in glibc (eg. _libc_write().
> And finally, the versio
On Thu, 9 Dec 1999, Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 05:41:09PM -0500, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> > Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
> > > Actually, I don't think all that many apps use pthread_cancel().
> > > Its kind of messy to use. Most can get along without it, which
> > > is why
On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 05:41:09PM -0500, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
> > Actually, I don't think all that many apps use pthread_cancel().
> > Its kind of messy to use. Most can get along without it, which
> > is why there have only been a limited number of complaints about
Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
> Actually, I don't think all that many apps use pthread_cancel().
> Its kind of messy to use. Most can get along without it, which
> is why there have only been a limited number of complaints about
> the lack of pthread_cancel() in libc_r (until recently). BTW,
> I ha
On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 12:57:45PM -0800, Jason Evans wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 06:42:56AM -0600, Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 12:35:17AM -0800, Jason Evans wrote:
> >
> > The problem with cancellation points, libc and linuxthreads has been
> > that you need to wa
Jason Evans wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 06:42:56AM -0600, Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 12:35:17AM -0800, Jason Evans wrote:
> >
> > The problem with cancellation points, libc and linuxthreads has been
> > that you need to wade through libc and replace instances of,
On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 06:42:56AM -0600, Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 12:35:17AM -0800, Jason Evans wrote:
>
> The problem with cancellation points, libc and linuxthreads has been
> that you need to wade through libc and replace instances of, for
> example, write() with
On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 06:42:56AM -0600, Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
> In this case, you'd want, for example, an _lseek(), _libc_lseek(),
> and _seek().
I meant "and lseek()", not _seek().
--
Richard Seaman, Jr. email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
5182 N. Maple Lanephone: 262-367-
On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 12:35:17AM -0800, Jason Evans wrote:
> I've got a port of the most recent LinuxThreads (glibc-linuxthreads-2.1.2)
> running,
Great!
> but ran into a couple of minor problems integrating with our libc.
> LinuxThreads redefines a number of functions in order to make them ei
Jason Evans wrote:
> I've got a port of the most recent LinuxThreads (glibc-linuxthreads-2.1.2)
> running, but ran into a couple of minor problems integrating with our libc.
> LinuxThreads redefines a number of functions in order to make them either
> support thread cancellation or work correctly.
12 matches
Mail list logo
