Yes, but bolting on extra functionality that belongs to syscalls using sysctl
creates a rats
nest for userland in the long term, and it is not exactly cheap to maintain and
document
all the sysctl code. And with versioning you get to kill the old versions if
you want, with
sysctl you are left w
Hi!
When compiling perl on NetBSD with -Duselongdouble, some functions are
missing.
The perl people found that out themselves:
https://rt.perl.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=134376
here's the smoke test on NetBSD 8.1:
http://perl5.test-smoke.org/report/93329
Reading the output, there seems to
On 22.09.2019 19:09, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Sep 22, 6:59pm, n...@gmx.com (Kamil Rytarowski) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: wedge device to name
>
> | Looking at the diff here, just adding f_mntfromlabel[] is a better
> | choice and it does not make too much dead code in old syscall version.
> |
>
On Sep 22, 6:59pm, n...@gmx.com (Kamil Rytarowski) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: wedge device to name
| Looking at the diff here, just adding f_mntfromlabel[] is a better
| choice and it does not make too much dead code in old syscall version.
|
| I propose to go for versioning here.
|
Unfortunately
On 22.09.2019 18:22, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Sep 22, 5:58pm, n...@gmx.com (Kamil Rytarowski) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: wedge device to name
>
> | I understand and I know. Unfortunately (or fortunately) we will need to
> | live with the old syscall forever.
>
> Yes, but cleaning the old code i
On Sep 22, 5:58pm, n...@gmx.com (Kamil Rytarowski) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: wedge device to name
| I understand and I know. Unfortunately (or fortunately) we will need to
| live with the old syscall forever.
Yes, but cleaning the old code is obvious and simple. Untangling the
sysctl-augmented API
On 22.09.2019 17:50, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> Yes, but bolting on extra functionality that belongs to syscalls using
> sysctl creates a rats
> nest for userland in the long term, and it is not exactly cheap to
> maintain and document
> all the sysctl code. And with versioning you get to kill the o
I propose to pick sysctl, as it is already an existing interface to do
this work and it does not need to version syscalls.
Versioning syscalls costs, especially in testing older code-paths.
On 22.09.2019 17:15, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> Well, it is less natural and the programs need to so somethin
Well, it is less natural and the programs need to so something special to get
the information.
Anyway if people prefer the sysctl patch we can do that instead. OTOH it is
very instructive
to see how much work is needed to version a syscall in a single commit :-)
christos
> On Sep 22, 2019, at 1
On 22.09.2019 15:39, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article ,
> Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> In article ,
>> Michael van Elst wrote:
>>> chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas) writes:
>>>
I added that to df, but it needs root/operator in order to access the
device node to get wedge info. I als
In article ,
Christos Zoulas wrote:
>In article ,
>Michael van Elst wrote:
>>chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas) writes:
>>
>>>I added that to df, but it needs root/operator in order to access the
>>>device node to get wedge info. I also wrote a patch to expose the
>>>wedge info via sysctl:
>>
11 matches
Mail list logo
