Ulrich Drepper wrote:
>
> "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@transmeta.com> writes:
>
> > Interesting. I thought that was the whole purpose of shmfs?
>
> Did you tried looking at this at some time? mkdir() does not work in
> the shmfs. All you can create are regular files. Even if it would
> work, you would need some sort of overlay filesystem to make the files
> visible in the real filesystem. Then you have to take care of name
> collisions etc etc. It's OK how it's done today. It's sufficient.
>
Ulrich, are you genuinely saying that even if shmfs isn't mounted onto a
path such that open() can reach it, the glibc 2.2 POSIX IPC
implementation still works?
If not, I think you have misunderstood the thread. If yes, I don't
understand why we need shmfs at all...
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 07 2000 - 21:00:17 EST