On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:13 AM, Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sam, 2011-03-19 at 19:48 +0530, mohit verma wrote: [...]
> is there any need of raise() system call if we have kill() systemNo there is no need. But at least on Fedora 13, `man 2 raise` doesn't
> call which is capable of sending signals to the process itself?
give anything but `man 3 raise` does. The simple interpretation is that
that raise() is a C library function and not a system call.
Yeah , i almost forgot that. thanks. But here is a solid example ( i think) : clone(2) and fork(2) system calls. clone() is internally handled by fork handlers.
Well, you can implement your idea as a library function too.
Apart from the "just for fun" factor or to learn how to implement a new
system call, I see no real gain to move that into kernel.
I think it should be there in kernel not because it is my idea but for good reasons (personally think so).
FullACK. The system calls were defined ages ago and who knows now what
> Actually there are lots of examples of this type .Some of them are for
> compatibility reasons and still some are "i dont know why." :)
and why people (and *who*) defined it, so some cruft should be expected.
And since such design decision tend to live for ages, more people should
throw their thoughts in .....
[...]
--
........................
MOHIT VERMA
_______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
