From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/132 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: cluts review Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 09:42:38 -0400 Message-ID: <20110713134238.GB16618@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20110713110723.GA22153@openwall.com> <4E1D8964.3020502@gmail.com> <20110713122128.GA22658@openwall.com> <4E1D9631.3070203@gmail.com> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1310565129 31938 80.91.229.12 (13 Jul 2011 13:52:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 13:52:09 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-216-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Jul 13 15:52:06 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@lo.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by lo.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QgzrB-0000I9-4I for gllmg-musl@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 15:52:05 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 5930 invoked by uid 550); 13 Jul 2011 13:52:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 5921 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2011 13:52:04 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E1D9631.3070203@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:132 Archived-At: On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 02:57:21PM +0200, Luka Marčetić wrote: > >>Instead of > >>for PATH_MAX, will limits.h do (that's what i usually include)? > >No, it doesn't get PATH_MAX defined for me. > > Strange, SUSv4 (which is really the std I'm testing for compliance > against) says it should be there. I'm surprised you don't have any > issues with SUS-specific functions. So, do you want me to replace > limits with param.h? Don't use sys/param.h unless you make it conditional on some check for broken platforms (HURD?) that lack PATH_MAX. > I already have my sreturnf function for such purposes (right now it > uses vsnprintf). Why do you think *snprintf and *asprintf aren't > portable? *asprintf is not portable because it's a GNU extension, but it's trivial to implement it as a wrapper for vsnprintf which is standard. See the code in musl for an example of how to do it. Rich