Posted Aug 27, 2009 11:34 UTC (Thu) by hppnq
In reply to: O_NOSTD
Parent article: In brief
And now this O_NOSTD...so instead of just calling a single function at program startup, I have to change every open call in every library that I use to use O_NOSTD? Yeah, right.
There's nothing that forces you to use O_NOSTD. If you want to manually make sure that your fd's are numbered properly -- which has to be a bit of a kludge considering the nature of the problem of having regular fd's with a special meaning -- then it should still work as before.
If they're that concerned about number-of-syscalls-per-program-start, why not just make a single syscall for "make sure I have fds 0,1, and 2 open to a fd, otherwise open /dev/null there". Yay, now I only have a single syscall on program startup. That'd make much more sense than this proposal...
Then all we'd need is CAP_DO_WHAT_I_MEAN and O_NOSH*T. There's no fun in that.
to post comments)