From owner-cvs-all  Mon Apr 27 22:11:27 1998
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA15678
          for cvs-all-outgoing; Mon, 27 Apr 1998 22:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA15671
          for <committers@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 27 Apr 1998 22:11:25 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from bde@godzilla.zeta.org.au)
Received: (from bde@localhost)
	by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA12208;
	Tue, 28 Apr 1998 15:06:45 +1000
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 15:06:45 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199804280506.PAA12208@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: bde@zeta.org.au, jb@cimlogic.com.au
Subject: Re: Syscall as weak symbols
Cc: committers@FreeBSD.ORG
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

>As part of a cleanup to things related to libc, I'd like to change
>the SYSCALL macro to generate (something like) __syscall_name as
>the non-weak symbol for the `name' syscall, and declare name as a
>weak symbol so that an "nm -W write.o" gives:
>
>00000008 T  __syscall_write
>         U  cerror
>00000008 TW write
             _write for a.out

This seems reasonable, provided weak symbols work right now.  I would
prefer a prefix of `__' or even `_' instead of `_syscall_'.

Bruce

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message