Posted Mar 30, 2007 1:16 UTC (Fri) by cpeterso
In reply to: Really?
Parent article: Application-friendly kernel interfaces
Is it just because kernel->userspace interfaces are set in stone and have to be maintained forever? For that would feel a bit like medieval astronomers -- weaving layer over layer of epicycles so that their spheres would match the real planet trajectories. Here we would have a kernel interface set in stone, then some library code -- which once people use it would again be set in stone, only to add a new glue layer... again and again. Waiting a few iterations might be a better course of action, and I gather from LWN that it is often taken by kernel devs.
I think the kernel API can
change, so user programs should use the "friendly" userspace library APIs.
to post comments)