On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 05:56:00PM -0700, Maksim Rayskiy wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Peter Mazinger <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > If we remove fallback codes generally, that should not be a > > one-man-decision, see how list reacts, maybe we can agree upon some rule > > > I was referring to pread/pwrite fallback functions only, not in > general. I can submit the new patch, but like I said - all the > architectures I can compile/test (mips and arm) are not using the > fallback case. > I understand that you cannot test it once the fallback is removed, but > the code should at least compile and link properly. > > Are you aware of any code that relies on _fake_ implementation? Maybe > the functions have been simply added for completeness...
They exist to provide the broken/fake emulated implementation on ancient kernels, not obscure archs. Whether pread/pwrite exist is purely a function of the kernel version, not the arch. Rich _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
