Re: System headers with clang?

Hi,

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Ren=E9 Ladan <rene@freebsd.org> wrote:
> 2011/10/11 Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>:
>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 12 Oct 2011, Matt Thyer wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Oct 12, 2011 3:25 AM, "Larry Rosenman" <ler@lerctr.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I didn't say bug for bug, just not generate stupid errors like the ff=
s
>>>>
>>>> one.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>>>>
>>>>> Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 11, 2011, at 6:59 AM, Larry Rosenman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We will NOT support clang as the compiler for lsof unless the system
>>>>
>>>> headers work the same way as gcc's do.
>>>>>
>>>>> That apparently means you won't support clang then, because it's not
>>>>
>>>> intended to be (or ever going to be) fully bug-for-bug "compatible" wi=
th
>>>> GCC. In this case, at least, clang is reporting legitimate issues whic=
h
>>>> should be fixed, even if folks continue to build lsof with GCC from no=
w
>>>> until the end of days.
>>>>
>>>> The elegant solution would be to avoid this problem altogether by
>>>> re-implementation of lsof using interfaces into the kernel that provid=
e
>>>> the
>>>> required information.
>>>>
>>>> bsdof anyone?
>>>>
>>> lsof is PORTABLE and available on LOTS of platforms.
>>>
>>> We have fstat, but lsof can be used between differing OS's.
>>>
>>> We've also asked for Kernel interfaces before, but no one volunteered
>>> to make the KPI for them.
>>>
>>> I'm sure if someone(tm) (not me, insufficient knowledge) was
>>> to make interfaces for ALL that lsof needs, Vic would implement it
>>> as it would make his life easier.
>>
>> It would be nice in general if there were sysctls for accessing this
>> data as even utilities in base have libkvm magic sprinkled around with
>> pointer magic by default instead of using the sysctl analogs (I'm
>> referring to ifconfig, netstat, etc), and as noted by some.. using
>> libkvm on live memory could be potentially; the only valid usage I can
>> really think of is when dealing with .
>>
>> What data does Vic need to grab from the kernel in order to get the
>> file descriptor data?
>>
> Just a quick note that FreeBSD 9 and later also have libprocstat which
> could be a nice interface. =A0I haven't looked at the details yet though.
>
libprocstat is _itself_ a problem:

% git grep 'define _KERNEL' .
[...]
lib/libprocstat/cd9660.c:#define _KERNEL
lib/libprocstat/nwfs.c:#define _KERNEL
lib/libprocstat/smbfs.c:#define _KERNEL
lib/libprocstat/udf.c:#define _KERNEL
lib/libprocstat/zfs.c:#define _KERNEL
[...]

ok, I admit this is all FS related stuff :)

 - Arnaud
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"