This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: support for calling Linux syscalls directly


On 02/04/2013 11:42 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 02/04/2013 09:52 AM, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx>
>> Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 09:01:27 -0500
>>
>>> I'm largely against libinux. There does not seem to be any compelling
>>> reason for making a new library to hold 500 bytes of syscall wrapper
>>> code, and I agree the distinction of what goes there versus libc seems
>>> arbitrary and confusing.
>>
>> This is my position as well, we should just put all the syscall stubs
>> in libc.
>>
> 
> After seeing the list, I do agree that the case for libinux seems pretty
> weak.  I don't have a strong opinion on glibc vs libinux, I just want to
> get rid of syscall(3).
> 

On that note, too, though: I don't want a whole bunch of libraries
implementing their own syscall hooks, either, so if libc doesn't want to
deal with some subset of system calls then there probably is a need for
a libinux.

Which way to go is at this point up to you libc guys.  I am fine either
way, but I'd like to know what the plan is.

	-hpa



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]