Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 09:47:19 -0500 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com> To: Mark Newton <newton@internode.com.au> Cc: Matthew Emmerton <matt@xena.gsicomp.on.ca>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: iBCS status? Message-ID: <20000606094719.A19961@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <20000606162453.B83108@internode.com.au>; from "Mark Newton" on Tue Jun 6 16:24:53 GMT 2000 References: <000a01bfcf7a$cc810330$1200a8c0@matt> <20000606152128.B82736@internode.com.au> <20000606012552.A1515@dan.emsphone.com> <20000606162453.B83108@internode.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Jun 06), Mark Newton said: > > There is > > apparently quite a difference between Solaris and SCO SVR4; the first > > thing I had to do was change the lseek() syscall to use 32-bit offsets > > instead of 64-bit, for example. > > Interesting - Solaris has two lseek syscalls, notionally "lseek" and > "lseek64". If SCO only has one, which is a 64 bit variant, could > you perhaps let me know what its syscall number is? SCO OSR5 has only the 32-bit variant at syscall 19, and its args match the ibcs2_lseek syscall (int fd, long offset, int whence). UW7 apparently has two additional syscalls: lseek32 and lseek64, but I don't know what numbers they are; I don't have UW7. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@emsphone.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000606094719.A19961>