From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/4743 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: paths.h and similar constants, internal usage? Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 13:19:46 -0400 Message-ID: <20140329171946.GV26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20140329083856.GI8221@example.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: ger.gmane.org 1396113608 3373 80.91.229.3 (29 Mar 2014 17:20:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 17:20:08 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-4747-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sat Mar 29 18:20:03 2014 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 1WTwvI-0008CY-Kq for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 18:20:00 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 7549 invoked by uid 550); 29 Mar 2014 17:19:59 -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 7536 invoked from network); 29 Mar 2014 17:19:59 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140329083856.GI8221@example.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:4743 Archived-At: On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 08:38:57AM +0000, u-igbb@aetey.se wrote: > Hello, > > I noticed that musl defines certain constants but does not use them > even when it could. I find if better in the long run to have > a single definition of a string instead of multiple ones, for > various reasons. > > Would it be suitable for upstream to make use of the available symbolic > constants in the following cases where explicit strings are being used > instead: paths.h is just there for making some bad legacy apps happy. It's not a system we want to use. As for changing these paths, it's of course something you can do by changing the source and I can't keep you from doing it, but it's also not something I have an interest in making easy/automated. For the most part, changing them has no purpose except making it so your static binaries don't work on normal systems. musl aims to make minimal assumptions about pathnames, and those which it does assume are either required by standards, de facto requirements for compatibility with anything (e.g. the shell has to be at /bin/sh for scripts to work anyway), or historically so universal that any system can be expected to have them. Anyway, if you have specific requirements you're trying to find a solution to, please let us know what you're doing. For any request like this, a strong motivation is needed. Rich