Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.questions:12227 comp.os.386bsd.misc:3113 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news.uh.edu!uuneo.neosoft.com!Starbase.NeoSoft.COM!nobody From: peter@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions,comp.os.386bsd.misc Subject: Re: Whats wrong with Linux networking ??? Date: 10 Aug 1994 08:36:58 -0500 Organization: NeoSoft Internet Services +1 713 684 5969 Lines: 23 Message-ID: <32al5q$rck@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> References: <Cu107E.Mz3@curia.ucc.ie> <RSANDERS.94Aug9003813@hrothgar.mindspring.com> <329joi$eul@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> <RSANDERS.94Aug10014226@hrothgar.mindspring.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: starbase.neosoft.com In article <RSANDERS.94Aug10014226@hrothgar.mindspring.com>, Robert Sanders <rsanders@mindspring.com> wrote: >Are you suggesting a user-level implementation (ick), or are you >saying that you don't want space in libc taken up, or are you saying >that these IPC mechanisms should be deprecated by additional link-time >pains? The latter, sort of. Adding "-lcruft" to the Makefile (well, call it "-lsys5" if you like) makes it obvious that you're using a deprecated interface. >The first is sheer lunacy, the second would be silly (syscall >stubs are tiny, and ftok() trivial), and the third sort of ruins the >point of backwards compatibility. "Putting the backwards in backwards compatibility" Seriously... when you're using a compatibility feature you should make it obvious, so folks who aren't aware of the history don't fall into the habit of using them. (and if I didn't think there was a baby there, I wouldn't be here)