Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 08:41:45 +0100 From: Balazs Kezes <rlblaster@...il.com> To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, eblake@...hat.com Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: qsort_r or qsort_s in musl On 2018-09-03 18:53 -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=900 > > I'm not aware of any further progress on the issue, but if it becomes > clear that POSIX is either going to standardize a version that agree > with the GNU definition, or commit to not standardizing any that > conflict, I think the level of consensus we have so far is sufficient > to consider doing it. Ah, so to get this into musl, POSIX needs to get this first. Is there a way to ping that issue tracker to resolve the issue? Doesn't look like random schmucks like myself can ping it. I think I found eblake's email, let me CC him. Eric: Would it be possible to resolve the above POSIX feature request one way or another so that C code can start using it more portably? I would be happy with qsortr too, it's nice and short. (This thread's archive is at the http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2018/09/03/2 url.) Thanks all! Balazs
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.