> Well, I'm whispering: The cost is that something desirable but > incomplete would be removed. While it's there it's a constant source of > irritation to those in the know. Once removed it can be forgotten. So > the cost is really that iBCS2 compatibility becomes less likely. What's > the benefit in removing it? Up to 20 cycles per exec? That's nothing.
Well you whispered many years too late. iBCS support vanished in 2.4 because nobody cared, nobody wanted to maintain it and not a single vendor saw a business demand to justify assigning someone to do any work with it. If you want it back then you need to port the 2.4 iBCS emulation layer code to 2.6 first. Of course you could probably also do it all in user space with some LD_PRELOAD work and binfmt_misc. That might be a bit slower but a lot more portable. Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
