Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2001 22:26:45 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> Cc: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, <arch@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Removing ptrace(2)'s dependency on procfs(5) Message-ID: <20011006221156.X824-100000@delplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <xzpzo76ry1w.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 5 Oct 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> writes: > > I've put up a new patch that places the prototypes in ptrace.h rather > > than add a new header: They don't belong in ptrace.h either, since they are used by both procfs and ptrace. > I left one instance of #include <sys/debug.h> in, so this patch > wouldn't build. The correct (and tested) patch is: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~des/software/ptrace-20011005b.diff Please include things that you want reviewed in mail unless they are large (100K+ or so). I noticed the following bugs: - PHOLD()/PRELE() is now missing from the register access functions of ptrace(). This makes the bogus EIO error in PROCFS_ACTION() much less unlikely. - there is lots of gratuitous breakage of K&R support. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011006221156.X824-100000>