Re: 'break' system call man page is missing?

2007-11-01 Thread Lars Eighner
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Yuri wrote: What is the condition when errno=22 is returned? I figured this out myself by looking into the kernel source code. It is much easier to use man errno. But there still should be a man page for this since this seems to be only (or at least one of the very few)

Re: 'break' system call man page is missing?

2007-11-01 Thread James
On 11/1/07, Yuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > What is the condition when errno=22 is returned? > I figured this out myself by looking into the kernel source code. > > But there still should be a man page for this since this seems to be only > (or at > least one of the very few) system calls w/o

Re: 'break' system call man page is missing?

2007-11-01 Thread Yuri
> What is the condition when errno=22 is returned? I figured this out myself by looking into the kernel source code. But there still should be a man page for this since this seems to be only (or at least one of the very few) system calls w/out documentation. Yuri _

Re: 'break' system call man page is missing?

2007-11-01 Thread Jonathan Chen
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 12:15:48AM -0700, Yuri wrote: > I can't find man page for system call break. > /usr/src/lib/libc/sys/ seems to have sources for many man pages but not for > break. > > In the mean time in one case it fails for me with errno=22 (Invalid argument). > Is it's argument (pointe

Re: 'break' system call man page is missing?

2007-11-01 Thread Yuri
In /usr/include/sys/syscall.h it's listed as SYS_break with the number 17. Is it the same as brk(2)? Yuri Quoting Jonathan Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Are you looking for brk(2)? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/ma

'break' system call man page is missing?

2007-11-01 Thread Yuri
I can't find man page for system call break. /usr/src/lib/libc/sys/ seems to have sources for many man pages but not for break. In the mean time in one case it fails for me with errno=22 (Invalid argument). Is it's argument (pointer) related to /proc/##/map? One of the blocks mentioned in this ma