Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!csc.ti.com!ti-csl!m2.csc.ti.com!tilde.csc.ti.com!axis!axis!mikep From: mikep@dirty.csc.ti.com (Michael A. Petonic) Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals Subject: Re: asserts and unexpected returns (was: Re: Assert) Message-ID: Date: 13 Nov 90 00:50:43 GMT References: <18647@rpp386.cactus.org> <4057@awdprime.UUCP> <18658@rpp386.cactus.org> <4093@awdprime.UUCP> <18662@rpp386.cactus.org> <4157@awdprime.UUCP> <18717@rpp386.cactus.org> Sender: news@axis.dsg.ti.com (System News Administ) Organization: Texas Instruments, Speech Mushrooms. Lines: 26 In-Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org's message of 12 Nov 90 07:25:22 GMT In article <18717@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes: >In article <4157@awdprime.UUCP> daveb@bach.austin.ibm.com (Dave Burton) writes: >>I ignored this the first time around: >>The System V Programmer's Reference Manual also does not include >>namei() or major(), does this mean they're not there, or can't be >>relied upon in kernel code? > >go check the kernel on AIX V3.1, you will find that it does not >include namei() as a kernel service. clearly this proves that >you can't rely on non-standard or undocumented features. don't >believe me - go check the source code. no namei(). This is rapidly degenerating into a flame war (uh, too late). But, since it's already here, let me add... Come on, John! If you've got enough UNIX history to know what the hell namei() does, then you'll no doubt be smart enough to realize that it's not going to be a straightforward implementation on AIX with the filesystem *sufficiently* different than System V. If you're in this far, you'd better know what the f*ck you're doing. Your off-the-cuff/hard-and-fast rules are boring us, John. You wouldn't want to be known as a bore, would you (uh, too late). -MikeP