{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/specs/issues/201","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/specs/issues/201/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/specs/issues/201/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/specs/issues/201/events","html_url":"https://github.com/opencontainers/specs/pull/201","id":108010685,"number":201,"title":"runtime-config-linux: Require libseccomp constants","user":{"login":"wking","id":209920,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/209920?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking","html_url":"https://github.com/wking","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":4,"created_at":"2015-09-23T21:30:16Z","updated_at":"2015-09-24T17:00:00Z","closed_at":null,"pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/specs/pulls/201","html_url":"https://github.com/opencontainers/specs/pull/201","diff_url":"https://github.com/opencontainers/specs/pull/201.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/opencontainers/specs/pull/201.patch"},"body":"Don't punt readers to libseccomp, because this spec is supposed to be\n[a self-sufficient contract between the bundle-author and the\nruntime][1].  The bundle-author shouldn't care if the runtime uses\nlibseccomp, or which version of libseccomp it uses.  But they can rely\non the listed constants being supported (and we may want to bring over\nbrief descriptions to go along with the constants themselves).\n\nRuntime authors, on the other hand, may want to know that v2.2.3 of\nlibseccomp provides all the required constants.  I've added links to\nthe libseccomp 2.2.3 header from which these constants were extracted,\nand that should be enough of a hint for bundle authors to use a\ncompatible libseccomp version (if they want to use libseccomp at all).\n\nSpun off from #200, which has since landed.\n\n[1]: https://github.com/opencontainers/specs/pull/200/files#r40257217"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/specs/issues/comments/142988874","html_url":"https://github.com/opencontainers/specs/pull/201#issuecomment-142988874","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opencontainers/specs/issues/201","id":142988874,"user":{"login":"wking","id":209920,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/209920?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking","html_url":"https://github.com/wking","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wking/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-09-24T17:00:00Z","updated_at":"2015-09-24T17:00:00Z","body":"Looking back at #200, I realize now that libseccomp architecture is\nnot going to be a bundle-author decision, and will likely be filled in\nby the runtime-caller before invoking the runtime.  Maybe this should\nbe a more generic “kernel architecture” field (and not\nseccomp-specific?).  Then we don't have to worry about requiring\nsupport, since the runtime is clearly independent of the kernel\narchitecture (and matching bundles with compatible kernels is the job\nof some out-of-scope external tooling, see #73).\n"}}