This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com>, Willy Tarreau <w at 1wt dot eu>, Daniel Colascione <dancol at google 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>, 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 16:43:26 +0000
- Subject: Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?
- References: <CAKOZuesB4R=dCz4merWQN0FSCGrXmOgUUr4ienSbStBJguNv8g@mail.gmail.com> <bbc12da5-830e-99a7-95e3-d9da42947dc9@gmail.com> <20181111081725.GA30248@1wt.eu> <3664a508-ca74-4ff0-39a6-34543194a24e@gmail.com> <878t1zx4gj.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
On Sun, 11 Nov 2018, Florian Weimer wrote:
> People may have disappeared from glibc development who have objected to
> gettid. I thought this was the case with strlcpy/strlcat, but it was
> not.
Well, I know of two main people who were objecting to the notion of adding
bindings for all non-obsolescent syscalls, Linux-specific if not suitable
for adding to the OS-independent GNU API, and neither seems to have posted
in the past year.
> At present, it takes one semi-active glibc contributor to block addition
> of a system call. The process to override a sustained objection has
> never been used successfully, and it is a lot of work to get it even
> started.
We don't have such a process. (I've suggested, e.g. in conversation with
Carlos at the Cauldron, that we should have something involving a
supermajority vote of the GNU maintainers for glibc in cases where we're
unable to reach a consensus in the community as a whole.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com