This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?
- From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso at mit dot edu>
- To: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Daniel Colascione <dancol at google dot com>, Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs dot Nagy at arm dot com>, Dave P Martin <Dave dot Martin at arm dot com>, nd <nd at arm dot com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat 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: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 12:08:07 -0500
- Subject: Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?
- References: <875zx2vhpd.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <CAKOZuetdgk1QYhx1538-98rFpogMin=8DkPnCtU9_=ip23Vk7w@mail.gmail.com> <20181113193859.GJ3505@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> <5853c297-9d84-86e5-dede-aa2957562c6b@arm.com> <CAKOZuesta_V=doXsVLc2E6WCQvywdur3F+u2pFKaPN+CEQd+ZQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.21.1811141741000.16571@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <CAKOZuetCGCfNdJ2QM0phu3_3Q29f5Yeh=NHiM_A9MhHsCjK48A@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.21.1811141840140.16571@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20181115053026.GA20617@thunk.org> <alpine.DEB.2.21.1811151628490.27351@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 04:29:43PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2018, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
>
> > That's great. But is it or is it not true (either de jure or de
> > facto) that "a single active glibc developer" can block a system call
> > from being supported by glibc by objecting? And if not, under what is
> > the process by resolving a conflict?
>
> We use a consensus-building process as described at
> <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Consensus>.
So can a single glibc developer can block Consensus?
I've chaired IETF working groups, where the standard was "Rough
Consensus and Running Code". Strict Consensus very easily ends up
leading to the Librem Veto which did not serve the Polish-Lithuanian
Commonwealth well in the 17th-18th centuries....
- Ted