Am Montag, den 11.02.2013, 08:44 -0500 schrieb Rich Felker:
> The current intended usage is that __environ is used in ISO C
> functions and startup code that must not reference the name environ
> (since it's in the namespace reserved for the application), and POSIX
> and extension functions use environ.

If this was the intended use, the effective use was not in line with
it. execv and execvp had it differently.

> There's no reason the latter
> _need_ to use environ though; it was just more convenient and less
> implementation-specific. If you think there's a good reason to change
> it after reading this, let's discuss it.

With what I have added in my other mail (and you have snipped :) in
the current model there is even the danger that environ and __environ
split into two different objects.

char **environ;

int main(void) {
  return (long)&environ;
}

When compile-linking this with musl I get both symbols environ and
__environ linked in.

So it would at least be good that the internal use of it in musl would
be consistent and the C library would not see two distinct objects.

Jens

-- 
:: INRIA Nancy Grand Est :: http://www.loria.fr/~gustedt/   ::
:: AlGorille ::::::::::::::: office Nancy : +33 383593090   ::
:: ICube :::::::::::::: office Strasbourg : +33 368854536   ::
:: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: gsm France : +33 651400183   ::
:: :::::::::::::::::::: gsm international : +49 15737185122 ::