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

Reply via email to