From owner-freebsd-current Mon Feb 9 18:09:15 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA17289 for current-outgoing; Mon, 9 Feb 1998 18:09:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.119.24.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA17251 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 1998 18:09:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [194.198.43.36]) by ns1.yes.no (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA24324; Tue, 10 Feb 1998 02:09:08 GMT Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.6/8.8.6) id DAA13775; Tue, 10 Feb 1998 03:09:07 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <19980210030906.20113@follo.net> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 1998 03:09:06 +0100 From: Eivind Eklund To: Terry Lambert Cc: Eivind Eklund , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Heads up: static -ification References: <19980209064733.56080@follo.net> <199802091955.MAA29539@usr09.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.88e In-Reply-To: <199802091955.MAA29539@usr09.primenet.com>; from Terry Lambert on Mon, Feb 09, 1998 at 07:55:59PM +0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, Feb 09, 1998 at 07:55:59PM +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: > > I'm just about to commit a change that staticize close to everything that > > can be staticized and doesn't look unreasonable to staticize (almost 400 > > variables and functions). > > > > If anybody get problems with undefined symbols in some way, then please > > yell at me. > > > > GENERIC and LINT compiles and links as usual. > > Remember that functions and variables are exported interfaces in > many cases. This includes user space uses for "ps", "w", "netstat", > and so on, as well as kernel space uses. I know. I hope I didn't break any of them; the suspicion that I might have was the reason for sending the heads-up in the first place. I though fixing this (the extreme spread of kernel symbols) was worth the potential trouble. BTW: Speaking of symbol spread - you once gave a reference to the ld manpage and implied that it was possible to create new object files included a specific subset of the symbols from the original object files. I tried to find out how to do this, as I wanted it both for the kernel and for libalias, but I've spent quite some time without finding out how to do it. Would you mind giving detailed instructions? (Re-creating object files is easy, the problem is controlling which symbols to include on a fine-grained basis). > For a potential kernel environment, you should be careful to not > disallow dynamic replacement of kernel pieces using "generic" > loadable modules (ie: if something is a function pointer, it > should not be static'ed, unless there is an encapsulation function > that can be used to modify its value, and then the encapsulation > function should not be static). I think I may have broken one of these. I'll look through my patches again. (I remember seeing something that looked like the above, and I don't remember what I did with it. I just remember being in doubt.) Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe current" in the body of the message