From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Nov  8 08:04:38 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 7CBC216A4CE; Mon,  8 Nov 2004 08:04:38 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5942343D58; Mon,  8 Nov 2004 08:04:38 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from bms@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (bms@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	iA884cvS086092;	Mon, 8 Nov 2004 08:04:38 GMT
	(envelope-from bms@freefall.freebsd.org)
Received: (from bms@localhost)
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id iA884cqw086088;
	Mon, 8 Nov 2004 08:04:38 GMT
	(envelope-from bms)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 08:04:38 GMT
From: Bruce M Simpson <bms@FreeBSD.org>
Message-Id: <200411080804.iA884cqw086088@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: culverk@yumyumyum.org, bms@FreeBSD.org, emulation@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: kern/45785: Linux WineX seems to require a few new linux
	syscalls
X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems
	<freebsd-emulation.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-emulation>,
	<mailto:freebsd-emulation-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-emulation>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-emulation-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-emulation>,
	<mailto:freebsd-emulation-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 08:04:38 -0000

Synopsis: Linux WineX seems to require a few new linux syscalls

State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
State-Changed-By: bms
State-Changed-When: Mon Nov 8 08:03:54 GMT 2004
State-Changed-Why: 
5.3 is the new -STABLE.
Most of the functionality of this patch seems to be in -STABLE, with
the exception of linux_truncate64(). Is this call absolutely necessary?

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=45785