On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 7 Nov 2014 17:01:01 +0000 David Drysdale <drysdale@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> This patch set adds execveat(2) for x86, and is derived from Meredydd >> Luff's patch from Sept 2012 (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/11/528). >> >> The primary aim of adding an execveat syscall is to allow an >> implementation of fexecve(3) that does not rely on the /proc >> filesystem, at least for executables (rather than scripts). The >> current glibc version of fexecve(3) is implemented via /proc, which >> causes problems in sandboxed or otherwise restricted environments. > > Have the relevant glibc people seen/reviewed/liked this? I think it's been mentioned in passing but not explicitly discussed over there (https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2014-10/msg00497.html, https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2014-10/msg00509.html) and a couple of the participants in that thread (Christoph Hellwig, Rich Felker) were also cc:ed here. It sounded like execveat might be useful for another feature (O_EXEC) but I'm not sure whether that amounts to the relevant glibc folk liking this... -- 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
