Re: unremovable files and possible fs corruption (2.1.123)

Philip Blundell (philb@gnu.org)
Sun, 01 Nov 1998 18:03:42 +0100

>Also, in my interpreter-evangelist hat, I'd like to be able to bind
>anything to anything else, at any level, which at some point means
>teaching an interpreter to talk directly to the kernel, without libc in
>the middle. This ought to be possible.

It's certainly possible, but I don't really see what it buys you. All you're
doing is pushing some of the work that libc currently does into your
application.

Why do you want to cut libc out of the loop? If you're concerned about code
size then the way forward is probably to work on making libc more modular so
that you can do away with the bits that you don't need, rather than chucking
the whole lot and starting again.

p.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/