Wish for 2002

[Christoph Hellwig]

In article <200201030059.g030xT301198@shade.twinsun.com> you wrote:
> Portable code must define its own strlcat and strlcpy anyway, as these
> functions are not standardized and have different semantics on
> different hosts.

Please tell me which systems have different semantics than the
strlcat/strlcpy versions described in Tod's USENIX paper?

> So portability is not an unassailable argument for
> adding them to glibc.
> If a standard like POSIX required us to add these functions to glibc,
> then of course we would add them (perhaps with advice not to use them :-).

There's a lot of stuf under __USE_BSD in glibc that's in no standard at
all.  strlcpy/strlcat is in ~75% of the currently sold unix versions
which makes it some kind of defacto standard.

	Christoph

-- 
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.