[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: LFS vs procfs on SunOS
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 09:58:21AM +0100, Filip Hajny wrote:
> On 5. 3. 2012, at 19:46, David Holland wrote:
> > Can you explain *why* it's deliberately broken? Is it because their
> > kernel procfs code is bollocks and needs to be kept in a padded cell,
> > or is it some kind of library/headers management issue? Or is it just
> > Sun being deliberately difficult to discourage use of 32-bit code
> > and/or large files?
> This is the only relevant discussion that I could find (now that
> Jive is dead):
> "[...] the kernel has no way of knowing that a 32-bit process was
> compiled with large file support, only that it's a 32-bit process
> vs a 64-bit process. So to do what you want to do, there's no good
> way to use the more painless large file compilation environment,
> and you end up doing what they other poster said and using
> the transitional interfaces of the *64() form."
Gross. So basically the kernel procfs code is bollocks, and then they
compounded it by mishandling the header files. And all in the name of
chasing a nonexistent problem...
I don't see any reason to cater to this stupidity.
David A. Holland
Main Index |
Thread Index |