This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?
- From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso at mit dot edu>
- To: Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs dot Nagy at arm dot com>
- Cc: Daniel Colascione <dancol at google dot com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, nd <nd at arm dot com>, "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>, Joel Fernandes <joelaf at google dot com>, Linux API <linux-api at vger dot kernel dot org>, Willy Tarreau <w at 1wt dot eu>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka at suse dot cz>, Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>, "libc-alpha at sourceware dot org" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2018 09:35:06 -0500
- Subject: Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?
- References: <CAKOZuesB4R=dCz4merWQN0FSCGrXmOgUUr4ienSbStBJguNv8g@mail.gmail.com> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <CAKOZues5SEESpJU=6MDTrPXTA1KTZFGNQE4Lw4t0fO-WBTU62w@mail.gmail.com> <email@example.com>
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 12:45:26PM +0000, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> >> A lot of the new system calls lack clear specifications or are just
> >> somewhat misdesigned. For example, pkey_alloc
> > [snip]
> >> getrandom still causes boot delays
I'll note that what some people consider misdesigns, others consider
Some people may consider it more important to avoid boot delays;
others would consider internet-wide security problems, ala
https://factorable.net to be higher priority.
It's clear this is one area where I and some glibc developers have had
a difference of opinion. The bigger problem is that if a single glibc
developer is able to veto any new system call, maybe we *do* need to
have a kernel-provided library which bypasses glibc....