Daniel Eischen writes: > > It might have been slightly clearer if the _foo and __foo names had been > > reversed, so that "foo" always weakly referenced "_foo" whether or not > > the function was a cancellation point. But that would have probably > > caused a lot of changes in existing code (?). > > Non-cancellation points are always single underscores so that > the implementation of libc can always use _foo and not care > about whether to use _foo() or __foo(). Libc should never > call functions that are cancellation points so it makes it > easier to just know that you should use the underscore version > of the system calls. The same holds true when libc wants > to use pthread_* routines; it should only use the underscore > variants so that libc_r can tell the difference between the > implementation's locks and the application's locks.
Right, forgot about that.. Thanks, -Archie __________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * Packet Design * http://www.packetdesign.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
