From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailout-webserver.scc.kit.edu (mailout-webmail.scc.kit.edu [129.13.185.232]) by krisdoz.my.domain (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s79FoGP7022524 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2014 11:50:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from hekate.usta.de (asta-nat.asta.uni-karlsruhe.de [172.22.63.82]) by scc-mailout-02.scc.kit.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.72 #1) id 1XG8uN-00033n-MS; Sat, 09 Aug 2014 17:50:15 +0200 Received: from donnerwolke.usta.de ([172.24.96.3]) by hekate.usta.de with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1XG8uN-0003ad-La; Sat, 09 Aug 2014 17:50:15 +0200 Received: from iris.usta.de ([172.24.96.5] helo=usta.de) by donnerwolke.usta.de with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1XG8uN-0007ye-JX; Sat, 09 Aug 2014 17:50:15 +0200 Received: from schwarze by usta.de with local (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1XG8tc-0000uc-M2; Sat, 09 Aug 2014 17:49:28 +0200 Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2014 17:49:28 +0200 From: Ingo Schwarze To: Paul Onyschuk Cc: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv Subject: Re: Portability of fts() functions Message-ID: <20140809154928.GD30999@iris.usta.de> References: <20140809123827.6df5072f894ac5795f4228d3@gmail.com> X-Mailinglist: mdocml-discuss Reply-To: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140809123827.6df5072f894ac5795f4228d3@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Hi Paul, Paul Onyschuk wrote on Sat, Aug 09, 2014 at 12:38:27PM +0200: > mandocdb.c in v1.13.x introduced dependency on fts() family of > functions. This will bite on non-BSD systems. Ouch. I dimly remember that was mentioned before, but then it seems i forgot about it. :-( > Musl libc doesn't provide it at all, neither does systems of Solaris > origin I guess, but then glibc does something even worse [1], relevant > fts.h header [2]. AFAIK uClibc replicated behavior of glibc. > > [1] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15838 > [2] https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=io/fts.h Uh-oh. Not pretty at all. I guess what is needed is a compat_fts.h/compat_fts.c just like for ohash(3). I fear that won't be something that can be done in a hurry, though. So it looks like for the 1.13.1 release, it's probably to late to fix the fts(3) issue, and systems not having it will have the choice of either running 1.13.1 with "BUILD_TARGETS += db-build" disabled (that is, without apropos/makewhatis) or stay with 1.12.4 until 1.13.2 comes out. Do you think that would be tolerable? Yours, Ingo -- To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv