Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 12:55:29 -0300
From: "dgutson ." <danielgutson@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: #define __MUSL__ in features.h

> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 09:44:05PM +0100, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
> > Is it possible to add to the features.h __MUSL__ definition?
> >
> > glibc can be identified by __GLIBC__, uclibc through __UCLIBC__ etc.
>
> Is this question in the FAQ yet? If not, it really should be. The
> answer is no, it won't be added, because it's a bug to assume a
> certain implementation has particular properties rather than testing.

That is a beautiful theory in an ideal world, but in the real world,

implementations have bugs, and sometimes we need to workaround these bugs.

(e.g. the FD* issue reported by Martin Galvan).

So when writing code that should work with different implementations, these

macros are needed to apply workarounds for implementation-specific bugs.

That's why all the rest of the C lib implementations do provide an identifying

macro, something that I think musl should also do, IMVHO.


    Daniel.


> So far, every time somebody's asked for this with a particular usage
> case in mind, the usage case was badly wrong, and would have broken
> support for the next release of musl...

>

> Rich



-- 
Who’s got the sweetest disposition?
One guess, that’s who?
Who’d never, ever start an argument?
Who never shows a bit of temperament?
Who's never wrong but always right?
Who'd never dream of starting a fight?
Who get stuck with all the bad luck?

Content of type "text/html" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.