Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 09:44:26 +0200 From: Alexander Larsson <alexander.larsson@...il.com> To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Using direct socket syscalls on x86_32 where available? On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote: > > One way to implement it would be to favor the new syscalls but to set some > variable the first time one of them returns ENOSYS. Once that happens, > either all of them could fall back to socketcall or just that one syscall > could. > > Or you could just avoid implementing it and see if anyone complains. It's > plausible that xdg-app might start requiring the new syscalls (although it > would presumably not kill you if tried to use socketcall). > > Alex, if glibc started using the new syscalls, would you want to require > them inside xdg-app? Probably not. At this point 32bit x86 just is not interesting enough for such extra pain. We'll just not filter on address types on 32bit.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.