On Friday 06 April 2007 05:20 pm, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Jung-uk Kim <jkim_at_FreeBSD.org> writes: > > On Friday 06 April 2007 01:43 pm, Roman Divacky wrote: > > > I dont like this, I would prefer some dynamic determining > > > whether sysv symbols are present and if not just fill > > > in "safe" values. > > > > You know I have used sysctlbyname before but it was shot down by > > des. :-( > > I didn't shoot anything down. If you read my email again, you'll > see that I pointed out that it was slow, but that we didn't really > have a choice precisely because sysv{msg,sem} were not guaranteed > to be present. > > Dropping sysctlbyname() was *your* choice. I agreed with the > revised patch because you pointed out that linprocfs depends on > linux, which depends on sysv{msg,sem}, so we *could* rely on their > presence. It was a bad choice of words. Sorry, Jung-uk KimReceived on Fri Apr 06 2007 - 19:51:28 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:07 UTC