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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d3dd97da-c246-6271-e1b5-91a858836422@infradead.org>
Date:   Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:32:42 -0800
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To:     Carlos O'Donell <carlos@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?

On 12/10/18 9:39 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 12/10/18 11:27 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 20:38:56 -0800
>> Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/12/18 8:08 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 11 Nov 2018 18:36:30 -0800
>>>> Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>>   
>>>>> We should have a checklist.  That's a great idea.  Now to find someone
>>>>> to write it... :)  
>>>>
>>>> Do we think the LPC session might have the right people to create such a
>>>> thing?  If so, I can try to put together a coherent presentation of the
>>>> result.  
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>> Did anything ever happen with this syscall checklist suggestion?
>>
>> No, we really didn't have the right people around to do that,
>> unfortunately.  
> 
> We already have Documentation/process/adding-syscalls.rst.
> 
> The documentation there is quite thorough.
> 
> It lists things that people commonly forget e.g. email linux-api@...r.kernel.org.
> 
> Would it be acceptable to attempt to collate per-libc information
> into the adding-syscalls.rst under a new section called:
> 
> "Integration with libc"
> 

I think that updates to adding-syscalls.rst would be sufficient,
instead of having a new/separate syscalls-checklist file.

thanks,
-- 
~Randy