FrankH. wrote: >And the implementation in usr/src/uts/common/contract/process.c is an >"always success" one (returns 0), while the one in >usr/src/uts/common/contract/device.c is an "always fail" one (returns >ENOTSUP). One wonders - what's the point ? Or what does the original >poster attempt to do ?
The point is that I want to know why the ct_ctl_newct() and ct_ctl_qack() of libcontract.so.1 is always return zero(i.e "0") in the process contract of solaris 5.11 release snv_47 and snv_54, even when I pass the worng input to the functions. This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list opensolaris-code@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code