From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1598 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Todo for release? Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 10:34:36 -0400 Message-ID: <20120815143436.GL27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20120813185329.GA20024@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120815040836.GJ27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <502B9CB6.6000802@gentoo.org> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1345041222 20560 80.91.229.3 (15 Aug 2012 14:33:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 14:33:42 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-1599-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Aug 15 16:33:42 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T1ef8-0007Sb-44 for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 16:33:34 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 3820 invoked by uid 550); 15 Aug 2012 14:33:32 -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 3810 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2012 14:33:32 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <502B9CB6.6000802@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1598 Archived-At: On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 02:57:26PM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote: > On 8/15/12 6:08 AM, Rich Felker wrote: > >On hold pending details on what the real problem is; unlikely to make > >it in for next release. > > > >Luca, if you still want this, please provide details on what issues > >you're facing that could be solved. I don't want to target old > >versions of standards unless there's a concrete practical goal. I > >mentioned one possible approach (using old versions only as a way to > >reenable stuff that was removed from the standard, not a way to get > >the entire outdated-standard behavior that would also require removing > >new symbols) but I haven't heard back on whether that would meet your > >needs. > > Your approach would be fine even making something wrong like > exposing all the symbols would be ok for my specific purposes. Could you explain a little bit what the problem is, like "I'm trying to build X and function Y is undeclared" or similar? Before trying to address the issue, I'd like to know what problem it's solving. :-) Rich