Date: 01 Oct 1999 14:01:34 +0200 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no> To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@scc.nl> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: new sigset_t and upgrading: a proposal Message-ID: <xzp7ll7cmsh.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: Marcel Moolenaar's message of "Thu, 30 Sep 1999 12:13:32 %2B0200" References: <37F337CC.5E06911B@scc.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@scc.nl> writes: > The problem > ----------- > When doing a make world, tools are being built that are used by the > build process. This is to make sure that the tools are appropriate for > doing a make world. The problem we now face is that the sigset_t change > causes this to break. The tools that are being built use new syscalls > not present in a kernel. Not only that, the new tools expect a different > sigframe in general. > So, the problem can be split into: > A) New syscalls using the new sigset_t (sigaction and so on) > B) A new sigframe (new siginfo, no sigcontext but ucontext_t) How about this: early in make world, we check whether or not the current kernel supports the new syscalls. If it does, good. If it doesn't, we build and load a small module which installs syscalls which translate the sigset_t stuff into something the old syscalls can grok. Does that make sense to any of you guys? DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzp7ll7cmsh.fsf>