Replace MUTEX_INITIALIZER with _LIBC_LOCK_INITIALIZER in generic code

[Samuel Thibault]

Florian Weimer, on Mon 22 Aug 2016 14:45:14 +0200, wrote:
> On 08/20/2016 07:38 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> 
> >>Because it was a special case for malloc and appears to be a Mach
> >>identifier, not a glibc identifier.
> >
> >Then let's call it another way.  But seeing this kind of code:
> >
> >static mutex_t list_lock = _LIBC_LOCK_INITIALIZER;
> >
> >looks really odd to the reader: why would I be using
> >_LIBC_LOCK_INITIALIZER to initialize a mutex_t?  I shouldn't have to
> >have a look at the mutex_t definition to know why it happens to be
> >right.
> 
> I have just posted the remaining two conversion patches, split into an
> automated and a manual part.

Ah, ok, thanks :)

Samuel