This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: linux:sys_ipc syscall
- From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki dot motohiro at jp dot fujitsu dot com>
- To: Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>
- Cc: kosaki dot motohiro at jp dot fujitsu dot com, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, monstr at monstr dot eu
- Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 09:29:03 +0900 (JST)
- Subject: Re: linux:sys_ipc syscall
- References: <20090507091205.265A.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <200905062026.22042.vapier@gentoo.org>
> On Wednesday 06 May 2009 20:13:16 KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > I would like to ask you if someone from you work on separate ipc
> > > syscalls. I mean that all code call one sys_ipc syscall not separate
> > > syscall like sys_semctl, sys_semget, sys_semop, sys_msgctl,
> > > sys_msgget, sys_msgrcv, sys_msgsnd, sys_shmat, sys_shmctl, sys_shmdt,
> > > sys_shmget.
> > >
> > > I look at http://repo.or.cz/w/glibc.git and I haven't seen it there.
> >
> > May I ask the benfit of this change?
> > In general, unnecessally ABI change cause very large end-user confusion.
>
> the ABI change is between C library and kernel. there is no end-user
> difference.
you assume end-user install newer kernel and glibc at the same time.
but it isn't gurantee.