Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 15:44:51 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: matthew@mundomateo.com Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kqueue alternative? Message-ID: <3EECF6E3.4BC96474@mindspring.com> References: <1079.10.0.81.10.1055692530.squirrel@www.mundomateo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Hagerty wrote: > I'm writing a little application that needs to watch a file that another > process is writing to, think 'tail -F'. kqueue and kevent are going to do > it for me on *BSD, but I'm also trying to support *cough* linux and other > UN*X types OSes. > > >From what I can find on google, the linux community seems very opposed to > kqueue and has not yet implemented it (they say: blah blah blah, aio_*, > blah blah balh.) What alternatives do I have with OSes that don't support > kqueue? I'd really hate to poll with stat(), but do I have any other > choices? The Linux community doesn't like level triggered instead of edge triggered. Basically, the KNOTE macro need another parameter, which can be used as a rendesvous between a kevent and user space. It has the advantage of not limiting the PID's to 16 bits, as well. I posted patches for this about 6 months ago. -- Terry
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3EECF6E3.4BC96474>