Re: Rumpification (was Re: CVS commit: src/usr.sbin/envstat)

[Antti Kantee <pooka%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Tue Dec 14 2010 at 08:13:44 -0500, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 10:22:34AM +0200, Antti Kantee wrote:
> > On Tue Dec 14 2010 at 14:22:50 +1100, Simon Burge wrote:
> > > 
> > > So now someone adding code to any RUMPPRG'd program now needs to
> > > effectively check each syscall individually to see if it needs a prog_
> > > wrapper?
> > 
> > Yes.  It's not really a very difficult rule.  I can understand the "I
> > forgot" vector, though.  I seriously doubt it'll be a problem, but just
> > in case, see below.
> 
> I have to say, this is extraordinarily ugly.  Why can't you make a rump
> libc instead that shims these symbols?

Well I could, but since it doesn't work, I won't.  For example, how does
a shim know what to call when it gets socket(PF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM, 0)?

-- 
älä karot toivorikkauttas, kyl rätei ja lumpui piisaa