Re: porting PAM

On Tue, 27 May 2003 invad3rkim@flexcheck.net wrote:

> > On Tue, 27 May 2003 invad3rkim@flexcheck.net wrote:
[...]
> > http://deadly.org/article.php3?sid=20010812210650
[...]
>
> Thanks. That is an excellent article. This is a little unrelated to my
> initial post, but I have a question about C in general. I've seen function
> definitions like this a lot: int syscall(int, char *)
>
> I don't really understand how function prototypes can get away with only
> giving the data type and not a name for it's arguments. How are these
> referenced from within the function?

If your question refers to the article: Don't worry! The artist just wanted to show us how the new system call looks like in userland. The point is that the function which implements the system call gets other parameters than the system call you've called from userland. Look at the actual system call implementation in the article and you'll understand what I mean.

Sven

--
You are not expected to understand this.
	- Dennis Ritchie (Unix 6th Edition)