On 06/15/2014 07:35 AM, Rich Felker wrote: > > Arguably, it was a mistake for the kernel to expose a virtual ELF to > begin with, and it should just have exposed a "lookup function by > name" operation to begin with. Yes this can be done in userspace, but > I see it more as a matter of "fixing a broken API design". > What the fsck are you smoking? There is immense value in providing a stable and very well-defined data structure, which also happens to be what dynamic linkers already want to consume. Providing a helper for crippled libc applications has potential value. Shaving a few hundred bytes off static applications is a very weak argument, simply because it is such a small fraction of the enormous cost of a static application, and static applications are problematic in a number of other ways, especially the lack of ability to fix bugs. Treating the kernel as an ersatz dynamic library for "static" applications is kind of silly -- after all, why not provide an entire libc in the vdso? I have actually seen people advocate for doing that. -hpa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
