From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Giulio Moro Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 12:19:35 +0000 Message-ID: References: <28fd59c00f574c5a987ff73d72ffbc4c@andritz.com> <4078e730-9293-12b4-e3c2-843f0de5f637@alaxarxa.net>, In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-GB Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai] Order options to build a Xenomai program List-Id: Discussions about the Xenomai project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Lange Norbert , Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda , "Xenomai@xenomai.org" > So, from my point of view it confirm my suspicious that the wrapper > mechanism is fragile. I really didn't understand why Xenomai core team > changed the native API for the POSIX. Although I saw the Jan Kiska > conference video explaining it, tell me primitive or dump, but I prefer t= o have > a RT API that links against RT libraries and you can mix the POSIX functi= ons > that you want in a clear way. > > OTOH I have to admit that convert a POSIX program to RT in an easy way is > amazing. I normally disable wrappers and call explicitly the `__wrap_` equivalent wh= en I want to use a Xenomai function , that is for instance `__wrap_pthread_= create()` instead of `pthread_create()`. I also add my own forward declaration, e.g.: int __wrap_pthread_create(pthread_t *thread, const pthread_attr_t *attr, vo= id *(*start_routine) (void *), void *arg); But maybe this is already provided in some of the Cobalt headers.=