Policy on new system calls? #540
Comments
|
New functions are definitely welcome! Adding them to this crate doesn't imply that they must be used, so it's up to downstream crates to use them or not. So in that sense PRs are definitely welcome! |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 3, 2017
Add support for the `accept4` system call for FreeBSD* & NetBSD* As outlined in #540. However since support for this system call seems to be committed, but not yet released in NetBSD & BitRig (is BitRig actually still be developed at all, btw?), I'm not sure whether it wouldn't be a better idea to only add OpenBSD support instead? What's the official policy on this?
Susurrus
pushed a commit
to Susurrus/libc
that referenced
this issue
Mar 26, 2017
…borne fcntl: Support getting and setting pipe size on Linux
|
Can this be closed since #546 was merged? |
|
I guess so… The policy is basically "add whatever you want, as long as it exists in some released version of that platform". So the opening question of this issue has indeed been answered in the process of getting the PR merged, yes. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I see that the
accept4system call is currently exposed on Linux, but not on FreeBSD, OpenBSD or other system that support it. Here's the Unix compatibility story for that, IMHO quite useful, system call:git blameon https://github.com/bitrig/bitrig/blame/master/sys/kern/syscalls.c, OTOH the BitRig 1.0 release page says it incorporates changes up to OpenBSD 5.6?, very unclear status in general IMHO…)Should these simply be submitted for any platform that supports them? Will that cause any issues for applications that target older platform?
Possibly related issues: #234
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: