From owner-freebsd-current Tue Oct 29 12: 0:24 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1F2D37B401 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:00:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from InterJet.dellroad.org (adsl-63-194-81-26.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.194.81.26]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02FF243E4A for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:00:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from archie@dellroad.org) Received: from arch20m.dellroad.org (arch20m.dellroad.org [10.1.1.20]) by InterJet.dellroad.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA80831; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:50:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from arch20m.dellroad.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arch20m.dellroad.org (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g9TJodZE008463; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:50:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from archie@arch20m.dellroad.org) Received: (from archie@localhost) by arch20m.dellroad.org (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id g9TJobld008462; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:50:37 -0800 (PST) From: Archie Cobbs Message-Id: <200210291950.g9TJobld008462@arch20m.dellroad.org> Subject: Re: gnome on current In-Reply-To: "from Daniel Eischen at Oct 29, 2002 01:41:56 pm" To: Daniel Eischen Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:50:37 -0800 (PST) Cc: Archie Cobbs , John Polstra , current@FreeBSD.ORG, dfr@nlsystems.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL88 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Daniel Eischen writes: > > It might have been slightly clearer if the _foo and __foo names had been > > reversed, so that "foo" always weakly referenced "_foo" whether or not > > the function was a cancellation point. But that would have probably > > caused a lot of changes in existing code (?). > > Non-cancellation points are always single underscores so that > the implementation of libc can always use _foo and not care > about whether to use _foo() or __foo(). Libc should never > call functions that are cancellation points so it makes it > easier to just know that you should use the underscore version > of the system calls. The same holds true when libc wants > to use pthread_* routines; it should only use the underscore > variants so that libc_r can tell the difference between the > implementation's locks and the application's locks. Right, forgot about that.. Thanks, -Archie __________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * Packet Design * http://www.packetdesign.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message