strnlen, strict ansi, newlib vs glibc
Mon Aug 18 18:53:00 GMT 2014
On Aug 18 18:35, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Aug 18 09:22, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> > Over the weekend, I thought about this and wondered if it was just OK
> > to delete them. Minimal nice is a nice post to newlib, Cygwin, and
> > RTEMS mailing lists saying these are being deleted and recommending
> > how to fix the code. That should be enough for Google to find.
> > If Cygwin builds without them, then the the likelihood of their being
> > code that uses them is small. And that part of the application is not
> > portable and wouldn't compile on Linux. I say break the code and I
> > don't say that often. :)
> Cygwin has a few places where these functions are still used. Fortunately,
> Cygwin has its own implementation of these functions (using WCHAR) so it
> doesn't require the exports from newlib.
> There are, however, two Cygwin tools using strlwr. The *exported*
> functions are the newlib versions, so they are in fact used. I see to
> it to drop these calls from the Cygwin tools in favor of a better
> implementation, but still, we can't remove the exported entry points for
> backward compat reasons.
> But probably we should. So what I'll do is this: I change Cygwin to
> export its own implementation of these functions. Having done that,
> we're free to nuke the newlib variants.
Done. Feel free to drop strlwr/strupr from Newlib entirely.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Newlib