the need for safe dynamic string libraries

[Dag-Erling Smørgrav]

Luigi Rizzo <rizzo at iet.unipi.it> writes:
> But my point is-- does the functionality that was removed rely
> on a different API, or we can keep the same API and have two
> different implementation of the hopefully few things that change
> between kernel and userland

Restoring sbuf_printf() to what it was would not change the API, but the
semantics would be different in certain cases.

The API would need to be extended to allow pseudofs to take full
advantage of the changed semantics.

(it is possible that the same functionality could be implemented in
userland using funopen(3); such a solution would have all of the
disadvantages of the current code except for the performance penalty,
but none of its advantages)

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des at des.no