Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?

Joseph Myers
2018-11-14T17:40:34Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1247 bytes --]

On Wed, 14 Nov 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

> I’m not so sure it’s useless. Historically, POSIX systems have, in
> practice and almost by definition, been very C focused, but the world is
> changing. A less crufty library could be useful for newer languages:

Historically, there was once an attempt to rework POSIX into a separate
language-independent definition and language bindings (for C, Fortran, Ada
etc.), but I don't think it got anywhere, and it's probably doubtful
whether the idea was ever very practical. (See the introduction to
POSIX.1:1990, for example: "Future revisions are expected to contain
bindings for other programming languages as well as for the C language.
This will be accomplished by breaking this part of ISO/IEC 9945 into
multiple portions---one defining core requirements independent of any
programming language, and others composed of programming language
bindings.".)

> > thread internals for syscalls that
> > require coordination between all user created
> > threads (setxid),
>
> We should just deal with this in the kernel. The current state of
> affairs is nuts.

Yes, we should have a few new syscalls to set these ids at the process
level.

--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com