On 22.09.2019 17:50, Christos Zoulas wrote: > Yes, but bolting on extra functionality that belongs to syscalls using > sysctl creates a rats > nest for userland in the long term, and it is not exactly cheap to > maintain and document > all the sysctl code. And with versioning you get to kill the old > versions if you want, with > sysctl you are left with the mess. > > christos > >> On Sep 22, 2019, at 11:42 AM, Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost >> <mailto:n54%gmx.com@localhost>> wrote: >> >> , > I understand and I know. Unfortunately (or fortunately) we will need to live with the old syscall forever. A programmer friendly wrapper of sysctl could be implemented in libutil.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature