From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1813 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Feature test bikeshed summary Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2012 20:02:34 -0400 Message-ID: <20120903000233.GA20144@brightrain.aerifal.cx> 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: ger.gmane.org 1346630424 17607 80.91.229.3 (3 Sep 2012 00:00:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2012 00:00:24 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-1814-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Sep 03 02:00:26 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 1T8K5Z-0002gQ-01 for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2012 02:00:25 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 16249 invoked by uid 550); 3 Sep 2012 00:00:22 -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 16241 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2012 00:00:21 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1813 Archived-At: Here's the summary of email results so far. I know I'm probably omitting responses from a few who've only spoken on IRC and not posted here, but it looks like we have a fairly even split, especially if I add myself to the mildly pro-change side. Status quo camp: nsz Luca Bobby Bingham nwmcsween Pro-change camp: Gregor (XSI+BSD_specific) orc (kitchen sink) Isaac Dunham (XSI+BSD) philomath (unspecified featureset, option 3) Would anyone who wants to see the behavior changed be willing to try a couple different potential profiles with the pkgsrc build and see how many packages work with just _XOPEN_SOURCE=600 or just _BSD_SOURCE or similar? In principle, I think the nicest variant of option 3 would be the minimal set of features that makes the majority of programs just work, without exposing nasty stuff that pollutes the namespace (like sys/types.h and sys/sysmacros.h getting included via stdlib.h...). If we do make the change, it would be nice if programs depending on stupid things like that still break so we can get them fixed upstream; I think our "it breaks with musl" bug reports would carry a lot more weight if we were providing a robust, clean yet compatibility-oriented featureset by default. Anyway, no decisions yet, but it'd be nice to do some tests.. Rich