From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43F86C43441 for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2018 16:43:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15DC62241E for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2018 16:43:37 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 15DC62241E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codesourcery.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730265AbeKMChg (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2018 21:37:36 -0500 Received: from relay1.mentorg.com ([192.94.38.131]:41948 "EHLO relay1.mentorg.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728199AbeKMChg (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2018 21:37:36 -0500 Received: from nat-ies.mentorg.com ([192.94.31.2] helo=SVR-IES-MBX-03.mgc.mentorg.com) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384:256) id 1gMFJD-0002kV-3j from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Mon, 12 Nov 2018 08:43:31 -0800 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.90) by SVR-IES-MBX-03.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.3) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Mon, 12 Nov 2018 16:43:27 +0000 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1gMFJ8-0002WI-SP; Mon, 12 Nov 2018 16:43:26 +0000 Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2018 16:43:26 +0000 From: Joseph Myers X-X-Sender: jsm28@digraph.polyomino.org.uk To: Florian Weimer CC: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" , Willy Tarreau , Daniel Colascione , linux-kernel , Joel Fernandes , Linux API , Vlastimil Babka , Carlos O'Donell , "libc-alpha@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: Official Linux system wrapper library? In-Reply-To: <878t1zx4gj.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <20181111081725.GA30248@1wt.eu> <3664a508-ca74-4ff0-39a6-34543194a24e@gmail.com> <878t1zx4gj.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Originating-IP: [137.202.0.90] X-ClientProxiedBy: SVR-IES-MBX-04.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.4) To SVR-IES-MBX-03.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 11 Nov 2018, Florian Weimer wrote: > People may have disappeared from glibc development who have objected to > gettid. I thought this was the case with strlcpy/strlcat, but it was > not. Well, I know of two main people who were objecting to the notion of adding bindings for all non-obsolescent syscalls, Linux-specific if not suitable for adding to the OS-independent GNU API, and neither seems to have posted in the past year. > At present, it takes one semi-active glibc contributor to block addition > of a system call. The process to override a sustained objection has > never been used successfully, and it is a lot of work to get it even > started. We don't have such a process. (I've suggested, e.g. in conversation with Carlos at the Cauldron, that we should have something involving a supermajority vote of the GNU maintainers for glibc in cases where we're unable to reach a consensus in the community as a whole.) -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com