[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
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.
