Re: [patch] Assigning syscall numbers for testing

Doug Ledford
2001-12-24T18:24:12Z

David Lang wrote:

> so this just means that an eye needs to be kept on the non-dynamic
> syscalls and up the starting point for dynamic syscalls significantly
> before we run out of space for the non-dynamic ones.
>
> running software that depends on features in a new kernel on a
> significantly older kernel is always questionable, if you software really
> needs to do that you need to watch for a bunch of things.

No. This is different. Calling a syscall and expecting to get either A)
the syscall you intended or B) -ENOSYS is an accepted, safe practice under
Unix/Linux. This breaks that practice.

--

Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com> http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Please check my web site for aic7xxx updates/answers before
e-mailing me about problems