[PATCH v3] getrandom system call wrapper [BZ #17252]

[Florian Weimer]

On 10/04/2016 10:30 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Fundamentally the problem I have with it is that getrandom must always
> succeed; applications cannot realistically be expected to recover from
> failure.

The current patch is the consensus which emerged after the first 
patches.  In particular, you wrote a while back, “I think it would be 
better to expose getrandom() as a completely unadorned syscall.”

As a result of this community-support decision, ENOSYS due to lack of 
kernel support is always a possibility.  I think this was pretty clear 
at the time, when the emulation based on device nodes was rejected.

Florian