Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Daniel Colascione <dancol@google.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
        Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>
References: <CAKOZuesB4R=dCz4merWQN0FSCGrXmOgUUr4ienSbStBJguNv8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20181110192027.GA29892@kroah.com>
From:   Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Organization: Red Hat
Message-ID: <cd4717c4-4950-7513-726d-2e1873aeceb5@redhat.com>
Date:   Sun, 11 Nov 2018 21:24:40 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20181110192027.GA29892@kroah.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 11/10/18 2:20 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> Also, what about the basic work of making sure our uapi header files can
> actually be used untouched by a libc?  That isn't the case these days as
> the bionic maintainers like to keep reminding me.  That might be a good
> thing to do _before_ trying to add new things like syscall wrappers.
I agree completely. There are many steps in the checklist to writing
a new syscall, heck we should probably have a checklist!

Socially the issue is difficult because the various communities only
marginally share the same network of developers, care about different
features, or the same features with different priorities.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to integrate better. As was pointed
out, various people from the userspace and toolchain communities are
going to LPC to do just this.

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.