Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 18:49:19 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Deng XueFeng <dsnofe@hotmail.com> Cc: hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Is this LOST?? Message-ID: <20040504014919.GA57723@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20040504090033.B046.DSNOFE@hotmail.com> References: <20040502132115.C583.DSNOFE@hotmail.com> <200405031322.37241.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20040504090033.B046.DSNOFE@hotmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--gKMricLos+KVdGMg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 09:04:53AM +0800, Deng XueFeng wrote: > > On Sunday 02 May 2004 01:26 am, Deng XueFeng wrote: > > > I found the htonl implemention in libc for i386 is not sync with the > > > kern. > > > > > > sys use bswap for swaping the int. but libc still use xchg. > > > IS THIS LOST? > >=20 > > It's because libc still supports 80386 which doesn't have bswap (introd= uced on=20 > > the 486 IIRC). The kernel only supports 486+ unless you explicitly bui= ld an=20 > > 80386 kernel, which won't use bswap for htonl(). > Since 5-current kernel do not support 80386. > why keep libc(5-current) support 80386? 5-current does support 80386, just not in the default GENERIC kernel. Kris --gKMricLos+KVdGMg Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAlvafWry0BWjoQKURAhqMAJ0YkHFWZqv9cRP31hUB7lZssHyn7ACfV07z Hk0Q+qyO4f+goBtakaWV8Pk= =/AZe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gKMricLos+KVdGMg--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040504014919.GA57723>