This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
I think the better solution is for those platforms not to have both modules at all, or have one empty. Why have two idential syscall entry points generated? I think you would get the right result by having an empty lseek.[cS] in sysdeps/.../ia64 to override the unix/syscalls.list definition. It might be handy to let syscalls.list indicate an empty module with a line instead of adding the files. i.e.: llseek EXTRA lseek 3 __libc_lseek64 __lseek llseek __lseek64 lseek64 lseek lseek llseek - so if llseek.o is built according to the first line, then lseek.o will be made a dummy object by the second line.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |