linux-kernel - Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <11149279-14f7-68b4-dc5e-d90924d40d0c@cs.ucla.edu>
Date:   Sun, 11 Nov 2018 17:44:52 -0800
From:   Paul Eggert <eggert@...ucla.edu>
To:     Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
Cc:     "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Carlos O'Donell <carlos@...hat.com>,
        "libc-alpha@...rceware.org" <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>
Subject: Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?

Daniel Colascione wrote:
> This resistance to exposing the capabilities of
> the system as they are, even in flawed and warty form, is what I meant
> by "misplaced idealism" in my previous message.

With my application-developer hat on I prefer some resistance to flaws and 
warts, as the resistance gives me a better feel for which functions are 
problematic and which can be used more reliably. If glibc is missing Linux 
syscall functionality that I really need then I can use syscall (with the usual 
caveats) and I've done that on occasion (and have regretted it later too :-). It 
is helpful for glibc to prefer mild curation to slavishly copying an API that 
can be a bit helter-skelter at times.