Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 13:38:01 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: getopt() not exposing __optpos - shell needs it On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 06:47:24PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > >> > Maybe I'm missing what you're trying to say, but all the state is > >> > clobbered; I don't see how optarg is a problem specifically. You can > >> > clear or set it to a sentinel value before the relevant call if you're > >> > trying to determine if the call set it. Across other calls (not the > >> > one for the current option) I don't see why it matters at all what > >> > happens to it. > >> > >> Yes, this can be done. > >> > >> It gets increasigly ugly, though. > >> > >> With these amounts of massaging around libc API design breakage, > > > > Yes the getopt API is horribly broken. It's all global state, with a > > tiny portion of that state internal/inaccessible. It doesn't follow > > that the solution is adding new extensions every time an application > > hits an obstacle from the brokenness. The right direction for fixing > > it on the libc side would be introduction (with consensus across > > important implementations) of a getopt_r API or similar with no > > global/internal state. > > I don't understand why you are opposed to exposing __optpos. > It does not even require any coding. Not a single insn needs > to be added. New public interfaces are a lot more expensive than new code. The latter can be changed or removed; the former can't. Over the past 6+ years, just about the only other party asking musl to add newly-invented nonstandard interfaces without existing precedent was gnulib, and after a lot of discussion that made sense because they were already doing the equivalent on other libcs through hideous poking at internals that were never meant to be exposed, and because the new interfaces fixed compatibility with tens (or more) of packages using gnulib that weren't even aware of its dependencies on poking at internals. OTOH you've requested this kind of thing for busybox hush twice over just a month or so, and in this case the (getopt) the same can clearly be achieved portably through the existing interfaces so there's not even a need. Rich
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.