Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 11:40:38 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: Matthias Görgens <matthias.goergens@...il.com> Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [BUG] hasmntopt weirdness On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 10:47:27PM +0800, Matthias Görgens wrote: > On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 at 21:57, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > > I'm pretty sure it was agreed upon at one point that this was a bug, > > but never pursued further. > > OK, that's good to know! > > > From what I remember, I think hasmntopt needs to check that the match > > found is at the start or immediately follows a comma (unless there is > > some awful way to embed literal commas) and that it's followed by an > > equals sign, comma, or nul terminator. Does this sound correct? > > For what it's worth, that's close to what glibc does. > > Sorry, I'm new to this: Is there a spec to these things, or do we just copy what > the other C standard libraries are doing? For standard functions, there is a spec. For nonstandard ones, generally no, and that's why musl frowns on them. We have to basically do what the standardization process would have done: looking at historical practice and whether the interface and behavior was sufficiently consistent across different historical systems with the nonstandard extension that we can work out a behavior that's not conflicting with what applications might expect. When this is difficult or impossible, that's a strong indication that we shouldn't adopt the interface at all. But due to historical mistakes (not doing sufficient analysis to apply these principles), we let a few things in we shouldn't have.
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.