Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 14:39:52 -0700 From: Bill Huey (Hui) <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org> To: freebsd@spatula.net Cc: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG, eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com, "Bill Huey (Hui)" <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org> Subject: Re: backporting libc_r changes Message-ID: <20020806213952.GA2381@gnuppy.monkey.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10208061521050.27161-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> References: <20020802101552.Y62438-100000@turing.morons.org> <Pine.GSO.4.10.10208061521050.27161-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hey Nick, On Tue, Aug 06, 2002 at 03:30:13PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > It's not _that_ difficult for someone who understands the > code and the differences. I wish I had time but I'm working > on the KSE stuff. If I did have the time, I'd try to change > -current so that it would work in -stable with just a couple > of #ifdefs. > > Notable differences between -current and -stable: > > o system calls are _thread_sys_* in -stable and > __sys_* in -current. The threads library could > always use __SYS_* or something and conditionally > define these to be the right thing depending on > whether it was -stable or -current. It's just like in that private mail I wrote to you a while back when you asked that same question to me. Did you think I was lying or something like that ? ;) > o -current doesn't include libc, so there may be > some differences due to that (cancellation > points and weak definitions might have to be > changed/removed for -stable). Sound like it's much the same stuff. :) bill To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020806213952.GA2381>