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: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1811151710490.27351@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
Date:   Thu, 15 Nov 2018 17:14:54 +0000
From:   Joseph Myers <joseph@...esourcery.com>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
CC:     Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>,
        Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>,
        Dave P Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>, nd <nd@....com>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        "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?

On Thu, 15 Nov 2018, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 04:29:43PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Nov 2018, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> > 
> > > That's great.  But is it or is it not true (either de jure or de
> > > facto) that "a single active glibc developer" can block a system call
> > > from being supported by glibc by objecting?  And if not, under what is
> > > the process by resolving a conflict?
> > 
> > We use a consensus-building process as described at 
> > <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Consensus>.
> 
> So can a single glibc developer can block Consensus?

If it's a sustained objection - it still works an awful lot better than 
how things worked before 2011/12.  (See my suggestion of having a process 
involving a supermajority vote of the GNU maintainers for glibc in the 
rare cases where a consensus cannot be reached - but those are rare enough 
that actually agreeing a process for such cases has never been a 
priority.)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@...esourcery.com