From owner-cvs-all Mon Jul 31 14:17:38 2000 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from netplex.com.au (adsl-63-207-30-186.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.207.30.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8675037B553; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:17:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au) Received: from netplex.com.au (peter@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by netplex.com.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA66719; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:17:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au) Message-Id: <200007312117.OAA66719@netplex.com.au> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven Cc: Luoqi Chen , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/sys Makefile.inc In-Reply-To: <20000731195522.C70236@lucifer.bart.nl> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:17:00 -0700 From: Peter Wemm Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote: > -On [20000731 19:50], Luoqi Chen (luoqi@watermarkgroup.com) wrote: > >Why don't we prefix all syscalls with sys_? > > It would solve namespace clashes at least. > > I am curious about other reasons why or why not. I would prefer that we changed all the syscall entry points to have sys_ prefixes. I know NetBSD has done this but I don't know their particular reasons. One thing though - it makes it more obvious what is callable from ddb and what is not. eg: 'call sync' looks harmless but will die because the syscall context is not present. 'call sys_sync' is obviously wrong. We could provide a real ddb-callable sync() function for ddb. I suspect that this argument would become a bikeshed argument before long though. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message