From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 19 19:25:30 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DB5F16A4CE for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 19:25:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from pd3mo2so.prod.shaw.ca (shawidc-mo1.cg.shawcable.net [24.71.223.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E60643D1D for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 19:25:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from timmssimon@shaw.ca) Received: from pd4mr3so.prod.shaw.ca (pd4mr3so-qfe3.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.141.214]) by l-daemon (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.18 (built Jul 28 2003)) with ESMTP id <0HUU00COEULOPP@l-daemon> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 20:20:12 -0700 (MST) Received: from pn2ml2so.prod.shaw.ca (pn2ml2so-qfe0.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.121.146]) by l-daemon (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.18 (built Jul 28 2003)) with ESMTP id <0HUU0091HULO9Z@l-daemon> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 20:20:12 -0700 (MST) Received: from simmain ([68.146.53.93]) by l-daemon (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.18 (built Jul 28 2003)) with ESMTP id <0HUU0051DUKYGD@l-daemon> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 20:20:12 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 20:19:45 -0700 From: Simon Timms In-reply-to: <20040318001802.51ccb1bf.cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> To: 'Chris Pressey' Message-id: <000201c40e2a$39a5d0c0$0c00a8c0@simmain> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2727.1300 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: KLD and UID X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 03:25:30 -0000 >What version of FreeBSD are you trying this on? >You might want to look at this thread on hackers@, it's very similar to >what you're trying to do, I think: Yes, I think I found that thread yesterday. I am trying it on the 5.x series and I notice that the proc pointer argument of a syscall has become a thread pointer. That would, of course, explain the horrible crashes. It is just a shame that I discovered that after my assignment was handed in, ah well such is life. Thanks for your help, Simon