[PATCH]: Implement getprogname and setprogname
Nicholas Wourms
nwourms@netscape.net
Tue Nov 18 19:33:00 GMT 2003
cgf@redhat.com wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 08:08:05PM -0500, Nicholas Wourms wrote:
>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>Corrina's latest check-in for stdlib.h prodded me into finishing the
>>documentation for my implementation of these two functions for newlib
>>(as opposed to just Cygwin). So, I'm submitting a patch with source,
>>inline texinfo documentation, and the bsd manpage. I am also working on
>>quite a few other bsd/SuSv3/c99 functions which seem to be located in
>>most libc's "gen" dir. So I hope you don't mind that I created that
>>dir. More contributions to follow.
>>
>>Also, if you approve it, please commit the bzipped patch, not the
>>inlined text one, since my MUA is munging tabs and some whitespaces.
>
I suspected that you might chime in on this, but before you jump to
conclusions, please hear me out.
> Then you should use another MUA.
I don't see what the fuss is all about, after all I did include an
inlined txt version for commentary. As for switching, I'm afraid that's
not possible, since I'm not changing freemail providers and netscape.net
requires that I use Netscape (not just mozilla) to get imap access to my
mail. I suppose I could just send it from a local exim daemon, so I
guess I'll look into doing that in the future.
>
>>Code is based off of {Free,Net}BSD sources.
>
>
> This is entirely BSD specific. IMO, it doesn't belong in newlib.
Indeed they are BSD specific, which was entirely my intent and I see no
crime in it. As for them not belonging in newlib, you have a right to
your opinion, however you also had plenty of opportunity to chime in on
this thread:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/newlib/2003/msg00509.html
But seeing as you didn't and since the discussion generally indicates
otherwise, I'll assume that they do belong and they are wanted. Next up
is my version of the *err/*warn functions from BSD, which benefit from
having these two functions available.
In case anyone thinks I just copied the sources from Corinna's version
in Cygwin, I didn't. I had already let Corinna know that I had working,
newlib versions of these functions and the err/warn functions back when
she committed the err/warn functions to Cygwin. The reason I hadn't
already submitted them was because I hadn't finished my testing and
fully documenting them at that time. I asked her what I should do, and
she told me just to submit my work to newlib and if it was acceptable
she would transition Cygwin to use it instead. I see this as a win/win
situation, as it consolidates pure C implementations from Cygwin to
newlib and extends newlib's core functionality for all platforms. These
aren't just off-the-wall functions, they are actually quite frequently used.
Finally, let me add that I purposely didn't make the functions compiled
by default for embedded targets in the case they are trying to achieve a
minimal libc. If you or anyone else think I should set the ELIX level
higher, then I'll be happy to comply. However, as far as I'm concerned,
I see no reason newlib can't be both as robust as glibc or as lean as
people want it to be. The great part about {free,opensource}-software
is choice, and that's all I'm trying to offer here. My code is
seperated and compartmentalized, so worries about it being extra bloat
or unmanageable are frankly bogus. In any event, the prior interest for
these and other BSD functions was indicated in that thread, which is
what I intend to provide.
Cheers,
Nicholas
More information about the Newlib
mailing list