Re: *printf_r and reentrancy

[Eric Blake <ebb9 at byu dot net>]

Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn <at> redhat.com> writes:

> 
> Yes, you are right for non-dynamic-reent configurations.  An error on 
> the allocation will cause the errno to be set for _REENT which is 
> incorrect except in the case of dynamic reent.  This needs to be fixed. 
>   It's a bit of a can of worms.  Do you want to make the changes or 
> would you prefer I do it?

Give me a day or two to tackle it (it will get me more familiar with the code), 
I'll either ask for help or have something posted by then.

Am I correct that for any function in the __ prefix (such as __swsetup), there 
are no backwards compatibility issues to worry about if I change the prototype 
or rename it altogether?

-- 
Eric Blake