[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50471B56.8040804@palsenberg.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 11:28:54 +0200
From: Igmar Palsenberg <igmar@...senberg.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: capset() capget() syscalls
>> Hi,
>>
>> Attached patch adds types to the existing syscalls, and defines the
>> types in the header. All CAP_* defines are also added.
> I'm curious what applications expect this header and definitions.
> glibc does not have such a header. My impression is that it might have
> existed at some point but that it was removed a long time ago, and
> that any use of capabilities without libcap (which presumably contains
> its own copy of the definitions for interfacing with the kernel) was
> long ago deprecated.
>
> Can you clear these issues up?
My own. Those definitions are part of the kernel syscall. While glibc
does support structure definitions for most syscalls,
capabilities seem to be an exception. (they are in linux/capabilities.h
to be exact). Oh, and I really dislike the interfaces libcap provides.
I pull those definitions in myself now, because pulling in kernel header
files is considered a bad practice (c) Linus Torvalds
Since these won't add a byte of code, it might be a good idea.
I'm open for suggestions however.
Igmar
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.
