From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IoORx-0006gO-Ph for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:14:29 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IoORw-0006fq-Vu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:14:29 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IoORw-0006fn-Q7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:14:28 -0400 Received: from sp604005mt.neufgp.fr ([84.96.92.11] helo=smtp.Neuf.fr) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IoORw-0001bz-GM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:14:28 -0400 Received: from [86.73.70.118] by sp604005mt.gpm.neuf.ld (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-5.05 (built Feb 16 2006)) with ESMTP id <0JQY00G342RS2RK1@sp604005mt.gpm.neuf.ld> for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 20:14:16 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 20:13:54 +0100 From: Fabrice Bellard Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] linux-user (mostly syscall.c) In-reply-to: <1194099328.2168.61.camel@phantasm.home.enterpriseandprosperity.com> Message-id: <472CC872.2090405@bellard.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <1194048343.2168.48.camel@phantasm.home.enterpriseandprosperity.com> <20071103012123.GB10975@networkno.de> <1194094355.16781.564.camel@rapid> <1194099328.2168.61.camel@phantasm.home.enterpriseandprosperity.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: thayne@c2.net, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Thayne Harbaugh wrote: > On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 13:52 +0100, J. Mayer wrote: >> On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 01:21 +0000, Thiemo Seufer wrote: >> [...] >> But it could be great to group the syscalls by >> categories, or so. For example, putting all POSIX compliant syscalls in >> a single file and using a syscall table could make quite easy to develop >> a BSD-user target (I did this in the past, not in Qemu though...). POSIX >> compliant interfaces can mostly be shared with Linux ones and a lot of >> other syscalls are common to the 3 BSD flavors (Net, Open and Free..). >> Being able to add a BSD target sharing the same code would be a proof >> the code is flexible and well organized; I guess large parts of the >> Darwin user target could also be merged with a FreeBSD user target... > > That's a reasonable strategy as well. I've looked through some of the > darwin code and have considered how common code could be merged. I am strongly against such merges. Different OS emulation must be handled in different directories (and maybe even in different projects) as they are likely to have subtle differences which makes impossible to test a modification made for one OS without testing all the other OSes. Regards, Fabrice.