On 11/10/18 8:20 PM, Greg KH wrote: > On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 10:52:06AM -0800, Daniel Colascione wrote: >> Now that glibc is basically not adding any new system call wrappers, > > Why are they not doing that anymore? FYI just noticed there's a topic relevant to this in LPC Toolchain MC: https://linuxplumbersconf.org/event/2/contributions/149/ > And there's no reason you have to use glibc, there are many other libcs > out there that hopefully are adding the new syscalls :) > >> how about publishing an "official" system call glue library as part of >> the kernel distribution, along with the uapi headers? I don't think >> it's reasonable to expect people to keep using syscall(__NR_XXX) for >> all new functionality, especially as the system grows increasingly >> sophisticated capabilities (like the new mount API, and hopefully the >> new process API) outside the strictures of the POSIX process. > > Patches are always welcome to be reviewed. But watch out that they > don't conflict with the libc headers. I know we had a "klibc" proposed > a long time ago but that died off for various reasons before it could > get merged. > > Also, what about the basic work of making sure our uapi header files can > actually be used untouched by a libc? That isn't the case these days as > the bionic maintainers like to keep reminding me. That might be a good > thing to do _before_ trying to add new things like syscall wrappers. > > thanks, > > greg k-h >
