Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:23:37 -0500
From:      "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.org>
To:        "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Kirk McKusick <mckusick@beastie.mckusick.com>
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/bin/df df.c src/sys/kern syscalls.master vfs_bio.c vfs_cluster.c vfs_syscalls.c src/sys/sys mount.h src/sys/ufs/ffs ffs_vfsops.c 
Message-ID:  <200311131923.hADJNbTN013180@green.bikeshed.org>
In-Reply-To: Message from "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.org>  <200311131839.hADIdHZY012652@green.bikeshed.org> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> > In message <200311122219.hACMJwaG007327@beastie.mckusick.com>, Kirk McKusick wr
> > ites:
> > >	From: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.org>
> > >	Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:16:07 -0500
> > >	Sender: owner-src-committers@FreeBSD.org
> > >	X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG
> > >
> > >	Does this mean someone may be free to write wrappers that block
> > >	ENOSYS, execute statfs calls, and fall back to ostatfs calls
> > >	(translating 64->32 bit values as best as possible, like the kernel
> > >	does) returning the new statfs?  Obviously, this would just be to
> > >	add a safety window for the transition period and to be removed
> > >	before a -RELEASE.
> > >
> > >	-- 
> > >	Brian Fundakowski Feldman                   \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\
> > >	  <> green@FreeBSD.org                       \  The Power to Serve! \
> > >	 Opinions expressed are my own.               \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\
> > >
> > >The above would certainly be possible. If this were a more heavily
> > >used interface (like say stat), it would be a useful exercise. But
> > >I do not feel it is really necessary for statfs. However, I am not
> > >going to object if someone wants to go through the exercise of 
> > >implementing your suggestion.
> > 
> > Uhm, as far as I recall, calling an undefined system call gives you
> > a signal you need to handle, before you will ever see the ENOSYS.
> 
> See, by "block ENOSYS", I sorta meant to say "block SIGSYS"... Still this 
> seems like it would be a useful enough upgrade path for -current users if 
> implemented soon.

Nevermind.  The libc version wasn't bumped, so the old programs are all dead 
anyway.

-- 
Brian Fundakowski Feldman                           \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\
  <> green@FreeBSD.org                               \  The Power to Serve! \
 Opinions expressed are my own.                       \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200311131923.hADJNbTN013180>