From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 5 01:30:58 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5A9516A4CE; Sun, 5 Sep 2004 01:30:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from VARK.homeunix.com (SYDNEYPACIFIC-SIX-EIGHTY-SIX.MIT.EDU [18.95.7.175]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42F5E43D49; Sun, 5 Sep 2004 01:30:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from VARK.homeunix.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by VARK.homeunix.com (8.13.1/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i851Uh3u029907; Sat, 4 Sep 2004 18:30:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: (from das@localhost) by VARK.homeunix.com (8.13.1/8.12.10/Submit) id i851UhLa029906; Sat, 4 Sep 2004 21:30:43 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 21:30:43 -0400 From: David Schultz To: Peter Pentchev Message-ID: <20040905013043.GA29649@VARK.homeunix.com> Mail-Followup-To: Peter Pentchev , src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG References: <200409030624.i836OPaL018916@repoman.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200409030624.i836OPaL018916@repoman.freebsd.org> cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/sys msync.2 X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2004 01:30:58 -0000 On Fri, Sep 03, 2004, Peter Pentchev wrote: > roam 2004-09-03 06:24:25 UTC > > FreeBSD src repository (doc,ports committer) > > Modified files: > lib/libc/sys msync.2 > Log: > Add a BUGS section and copy the wording from mmap(2)'s MAP_NOSYNC, > documenting the obsoleteness of the msync(2) syscall and its single > remaining purpose. I'm not nitpicking at you since you didn't write the original text, but if msync(2) still has a purpose, then it isn't really obsolete, is it? (Moreover, the text only describes the purpose of msync(2) with the MS_ASYNC flag.) Applications such as databases that want greater control over the flushing of dirty data may still find msync(2) very useful.