Re: unremovable files and possible fs corruption (2.1.123)
david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
1 Nov 1998 16:51:34 -0800
In article <linux.kernel.199811011731.MAA09889@hilfy.ece.cmu.edu>,
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH <allbery@kf8nh.apk.net> wrote:
>In message <Pine.LNX.3.93.981101115722.597A-100000@kjahds.kjahds.com>,
>Kenneth
>Albanowski writes:
>+-----
>| > Today I can write code that avoids libc altogether and continues to
>| > work, but if libc becomes the published interface, that guarantee is
>| > gone.
>|
>| 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.
>+--->8
>
>But that makes changes to the kernel interface difficult or impossible.
No it doesn't, It merely requires that you keep the existing
interfaces and add on newer ones as needed (which you need to
do anyway unless you like to have the userbase screaming at
you when a new kernel comes out and everybody who converts to
it suddenly has a nonfunctional system or a system that they
can't back out of if something doesn't work correctly.)
____
david parsons \bi/ And I don't even have the sources to clisp...
\/
-
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/