[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:10:36 +0200
From: John Spencer <maillist-musl@...fooze.de>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Todo for release?
On 08/15/2012 12:53 PM, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
> 2012/8/15 Szabolcs Nagy<nsz@...t70.net>:
>> * Daniel Cegie?ka<daniel.cegielka@...il.com> [2012-08-15 10:55:06 +0200]:
>>>>> - Support for __progname (Daniel)
>>
> We often say that we don't want to reproduce 'ugly stuff from glibc
> etc.' (eg. __progname). This does not change the fact that a lot of
> code will require patches to fix __progname problem.
i don't think that "a lot" of programs need it. actually i never
encountered it in the 200 packages i ported to sabotage,
and i even doubt that it is in pkgsrc as i never heard anything about it
in the irc channel.
since this feature would add bloat to every program, i am strongly
opposed to adding it.
instead you can just do a quick sed over BSD coreutils that use it.
> If Rich has taken
> the effort to rewrite/fix libc, we can fix __progname... if needed
> (it's really small patch.. discussed on the list).
>
> Daniel
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
