On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote: > "Garrett D'Amore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> These days, the interface guarantees are made at the app/library >> interface boundary, rather than the user/kernel boundary. And >> compatibility with Solaris is probably more interesting to most people >> than SYSV compatibility. I'm not even sure we are still SYSV ABI >> compliant. Anyone else know? > > most (if not all) programs compiled on Solaris do not run on SCO UnixWare and > vice versa. > I am not sure which side (or maybe both) do no longer follow the ABI.
Even the SysV ABI (for x86) did not specify the user/kernel boundary, apart from a _single_ exception, on which the ABI is explicit about: _exit() was defined to be "lcall $0x7,0". That's in: http://www.sco.com/developers/devspecs/abi386-4.pdf chapter 3-24, pg. 50. - to quote: "To ensure a process has a way to terminate itself, the system treats exit() as a special case. The ABI does not specify the implementation of other system services." FrankH. _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
