[Bug libc/9712] Expose futex system call

["joseph at codesourcery dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9712

--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> ---
On Mon, 10 Feb 2014, bugdal at aerifal dot cx wrote:

> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9712
> 
> --- Comment #5 from Rich Felker <bugdal at aerifal dot cx> ---
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 03:18:31PM +0000, joseph at codesourcery dot com wrote:
> > I don't consider Bugzilla a good place for suggesting possibly 
> > controversial new features.
> 
> That's odd, because last time I was asked to open a bugzilla entry for
> such an issue (lack of async-signal-safety of dprintf I believe). I
> thought wishlist/feature-request items were supposed to be on the
> tracker.

Only where they are self-contained and there is clear consensus about the 
desirability of the feature as well as a clear way of telling whether the 
issue has been resolved; not where a more complicated analysis, discussion 
and consensus-building process is needed, as here.  More open-ended 
project ideas, if you're not going to push the process through from 
analysis to implementation, and where there may not be consensus, go on 
the todo list on the wiki.  In this case, we need to agree on general 
principles for when syscalls should be directly exposed, then apply those 
principles to determine a list to expose, which might or might not include 
futex.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.