From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1599 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 10:36:40 -0400 Message-ID: <20120815143640.GM27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20120813185329.GA20024@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120815040836.GJ27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120815102029.GL20243@port70.net> <20120815133257.GM20243@port70.net> 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 1345041341 21654 80.91.229.3 (15 Aug 2012 14:35:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 14:35:41 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-1600-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Aug 15 16:35:41 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 1T1eh8-0001PO-Dn for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 16:35:38 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 5636 invoked by uid 550); 15 Aug 2012 14:35:37 -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 5625 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2012 14:35:37 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120815133257.GM20243@port70.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1599 Archived-At: On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 03:32:57PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > * Szabolcs Nagy [2012-08-15 12:20:29 +0200]: > > the main justification i see is that > > we already support bsd err and warn > > apis which are required to print > > the __progname as well > > (currently they don't and actually > > a simple warn("hi"); segfaults here > > with musl but i havent investigated > > it) > > it seems warn(0) and err(1,0) segfault > (they should handle fmt==0 before passing > it to vfprintf) > and they do not print the ': ' nor the > __progname Thanks for the report. This should be easy to fix. By the way, is it worth making these functions take a lock on the file for the whole operation (to make it atomic)? I'm leaning towards no, since they seem to only be used in legacy junk that's all single-threaded anyway. Rich