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]

Date:   Fri, 23 Nov 2018 15:23:30 +0000
From:   Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>
To:     David Newall <glibc@...idnewall.com>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>
CC:     nd <nd@....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 23/11/18 14:11, David Newall wrote:
> On 24/11/18 12:04 am, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> But socketcall does not exist on all architectures.  Neither does
>> getpid, it's called getxpid on some architectures.
>> ...
>> I think it would be a poor approach to expose application developers to
>> these portability issues.  We need to abstract over these differences at
>> a certain layer, and applications are too late.
> 
> Interesting.  I think the opposite.  I think exposing the OS's interfaces is exactly what a c-library should do.  It might also provide
> alternative interfaces that work consistently across different platforms, but in addition to, not instead of the OS interface.

you don't understand the point of the c language if you think so.