Re: STREAMS: interface versus implementation
Miquel van Smoorenburg (miquels@cistron.nl)
15 Sep 1998 20:42:45 +0200
In article <199809151647.MAA26154@rabi.phys.columbia.edu>,
Zack Weinberg <zack@rabi.columbia.edu> wrote:
>Actually no. I'm a libc hacker. All I care about is being able to take a
>_user_ program written to STREAMS and port it to Linux with a recompile.
>
>That means implementing getpmsg() and putpmsg() which are recv() and send()
>only different. It also means faking the STREAMS ioctls and /dev entries:
>
>Some help from the kernel is necessary, because putting a wrapper around
>ioctl in libc would kill performance for everyone.
Why not write a seperate library for this and link with -lstream.
Then only apps linked with this library would get the user-level
streams interface, and you wouldn't have to bloat the kernel and
the standard libc. Use dl_sym(RTLD_NEXT, "ioctl") etc to override stuff.
Mike.
--
"Seed me, Seymour"
-- a random number generator meets the big green mother from outer space
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/