[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161202195638.GB1555@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 14:56:38 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: compiling musl on openbsd
On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 03:29:45PM +0100, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
> Hi Szabolcs,
>
> follow question: is to possible to use something already in bsd rather than
> going through syscall emulation ?
A native-OpenBSD port would be a completely different target (or
rather, one per cpu arch you want to support on OpenBSD) and at
present is not terribly easy even then since the Linux syscall API is
assumed rather than using some abstraction around it. There are pros
and cons to this; at some point we might try to abstract it a bit more
to make it easier to do maintainable bare-metal ports (which would
also make it easier to port to BSDs, etc.) but even then some of the
BSDs simply lack underlying kernel APIs to implement all the corner
cases in POSIX correctly, particularly in the area of synchronization
primitives like robust mutexes, and I'm not really interested in
adding new abstractions for the sake of being able to write partial,
not-actually-quite-correct ports.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
