Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 13:01:12 -0700 From: Jonathan Mini <mini@FreeBSD.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 16816 for review Message-ID: <20020902200112.GY3751@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020902155121.14299J-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <200208302100.g7UL0hW3027550@freefall.freebsd.org> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020902155121.14299J-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson [rwatson@FreeBSD.org] wrote : > Hmm. I suspect the reason for ucontext.h was that that's the API exposed > by Solaris and other platforms with those context management primitives. > On Solaris, /usr/include/ucontext.h defines the userland API, and does a > nested include of /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h for some of the structures, > and the APIs for the system calls. Well, I suspect the same thing. I moved to sys/ucontext.h because on our system we have both, and I was getting nightmarishly-reoccuring problems with my <ucontext.h> not matching my <sys/ucontext.h> while I was modifying the sys/ version. What we do in the cvs repo will most likely be <ucontext.h>. I'd like to see <ucontext.h> include <sys/ucontext.h>, because the ucontext_t structure is defined by the kernel and then exported to userland (even though the *context() functions aren't syscalls). I dunno. I'll bow to more experienced hands on where to stuff these headers. -- Jonathan Mini <mini@freebsd.org> http://www.freebsd.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe p4-projects" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020902200112.GY3751>