Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 10:47:21 -0800 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: Mark Newton <newton@atdot.dotat.org> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: *1 routines in /sys/kern Message-ID: <199901301847.KAA01004@dingo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 30 Jan 1999 18:00:15 %2B1030." <199901300730.SAA20522@atdot.dotat.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > If I split sigaction(), sigsuspend(), sigpending(), sigprocmask() and > sigaltstack() into front-end and back-end pieces a-la NetBSD so that > emulator-specific signal semantics can be imposed without totally > duplicating those routines inside the emulator (like I did with > sendit() and recvit() for socket I/O), will anyone complain? I'd second Garrett on this; as long as it's documented somewhere that the *1 routines are the "backends", it sounds eminently sensible. -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com 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?199901301847.KAA01004>