On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 12:36:49 -0500 Chase Venters <[email protected]> wrote: > Unless 'errno' has some significant reason to live on in the kernel, I think > it would be better to kill it and write kernel syscall macros that don't muck > with it. We have been working in that direction. It's certainly something we'd like to kill off. - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] introduce kernel_execve function to replace __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__
- From: Chase Venters <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] introduce kernel_execve function to replace __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__
- References:
- [PATCH] Return real errno from execve in ____call_usermodehelper
- From: Björn Steinbrink <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Return real errno from execve in ____call_usermodehelper
- From: Björn Steinbrink <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] introduce kernel_execve function to replace __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__
- From: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] introduce kernel_execve function to replace __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__
- From: Chase Venters <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] Return real errno from execve in ____call_usermodehelper
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] introduce kernel_execve function to replace __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] introduce kernel_execve function to replace __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__
- Index(es):
 |