From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Newall Subject: Re: Official Linux system wrapper library? Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 00:41:05 +1030 Message-ID: References: <877ehjx447.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <875zx2vhpd.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <87efbbvrx9.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <87efbbvrx9.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> To: Florian Weimer , Daniel Colascione Cc: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" , linux-kernel , Joel Fernandes , Linux API , Willy Tarreau , Vlastimil Babka , Carlos O'Donell , "libc-alpha@sourceware.org" List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org 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.