This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [libc-alpha] Re: [open-source] Re: Wish for 2002


Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> writes:

> No, it's not.
> 
> Technically simple, yes.
> 
> But from a user perspective it is absolutely _useless_. Because you still
> cannot depend on the functions being there in glibc, even if _BSD_SOURCE
> is defined.

Excuse me?  If you add the functions, conditional on _BSD_SOURCE, then
how exactly would programs not be able to depend on them? 

> So programs would still have to do all the same autoconf to be portable,
> even if they used glibc. And that's the argument here.

But that's an argument for *never* adding functions to glibc.  After
all, any really useful function is already going to be carried around
just in case its absent. 


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]