You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
rustix is a library that aims to provide a safe system interface over the POSIX API, similar to what this crate accomplishes. However, rustix excels by using Linux's raw system call interface rather than libc, which provides a decent code size and performance benefit. It uses libc on non-Linux platforms and can be optionally configured to swap to a libc-based backend if desired.
I see two options here:
Rewrite vmm-sys-util to use rustix instead of libc. This would be a breaking change in this crate, as some parts export libc in their public API.
Rewrite higher level crates to use rustix instead of vmm-sys-util.
Which option would be preferred by rust-vmm?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi!
I think either option would have wide-ranging implication for both the rust-vmm ecosystem, as well as everyone who depends on one of our crates, so this is not really a decision any one maintainer can make. Maybe you could send your proposal to the rust-vmm mailing list to reach a wider audience, or bring it up at one of the community sync meetings? [1]
rustix
is a library that aims to provide a safe system interface over the POSIX API, similar to what this crate accomplishes. However,rustix
excels by using Linux's raw system call interface rather thanlibc
, which provides a decent code size and performance benefit. It useslibc
on non-Linux platforms and can be optionally configured to swap to alibc
-based backend if desired.I see two options here:
vmm-sys-util
to userustix
instead oflibc
. This would be a breaking change in this crate, as some parts exportlibc
in their public API.rustix
instead ofvmm-sys-util
.Which option would be preferred by
rust-vmm
?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: