[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Status of revivesa
On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 02:13:47PM +0200, Quentin Garnier wrote:
> > [...]
> > My "perfect world" solution would be to make the sysenter-compatible
> > reshuffling an option and make COMPAT_30_PTHREAD or some such another
> > option, and make the two incompatible. That way an admin can clearly
> > select which way to go. If either were a default, I'd make the sysenter
> > one default. :-)
> I see two issues with that (though I'd really like to use that
> - there may be 3rd party application that play the same naughty games
> as the old libpthread, e.g. by storing a ucontext at some point and
> re-using it later. I think of interpreted languages that can be
> compiled for faster execution. COMPAT_30_PTHREAD would introduce a
> very weird failure case.
> - if we ever decide to make a libci686 and load it through ld.so.conf
> games, COMPAT_30_NETBSD will become a real burden.
This second case can be easily handled: add a sysctl to see if it's a
COMPAT_30_NETBSD kernel and don't load libci686 in this case.
> The first point is not so bad; I don't even have any evidence such a
> bad application exists (but wandering around pkgsrc you see scary stuff
> though). As for the second one, it won't apply to 5.0 anyway, so we're
> safe for a while, and we might have a way out later (for instance, if we
> are to ever bump libc, we could bury SA again).
It would also be an issue only if you want to mix 3.0 and 4.0 userlands,
as I see it.
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>
NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
Main Index |
Thread Index |