Re: [linuxsh-dev] Other changes

[Stuart M. <Stu...@st...>]

On Sep 30, 12:10pm, gn...@ch... wrote:
> Subject: Re: [linuxsh-dev] Other changes
> 
> Stuart Menefy wrote:
>  > I was pondering the syscall syscall a few weeks ago, when some software I
>  > was porting needed it, and I don't really see the need for it. I guess
>  > the advantage is it will appear as a syscall in an strace listing, the
>  > disadvantage is it won't appear as a 'normal' broken down system call in
>  > the strace output. And that was the only benefit I could see for it.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
>  > So the approch I took was to do the whole thing in glibc, there doesn't
>  > appear to be any need for it in the kernel.
> 
> Good.
> 
>  > Or am I missing something?
> 
> I just put it as Kaz' kernel has the system call.  I think the libc
> approach is better.  I withdraw the change in the kernel.
> 
> I'll include your change of GNU C Library.  Is it OK for you?

Sounds good to me.

I've got a couple more gcc changes I'd like to incorporate (making
-with-cpu work and adding inline support for ffs), which I'll tidy up
and post in the new few days.

Stuart