From: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
To: libc-coord@lists.openwall.com, Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
linux-man@vger.kernel.org, musl@lists.openwall.com,
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: [musl] Re: [libc-coord] Re: [musl] Re: regression in man pages for interfaces using loff_t
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2023 16:02:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <574389bd-7481-7192-d1ba-f4e62e34c358@cs.ucla.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230701133652.GF3630668@port70.net>
On 2023-07-01 06:36, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> loff_t * can be incompatible with off64_t * as well as off_t *.
loff_t * cannot be incompatible with the off64_t in the current
implementation. The same goes for off_t, if you compile with
_FILE_OFFSET_BITS set to 64.
As you suggest, a future implementation might change this. But if
anything this strengthens the case for the documentation avoiding these
pseudo-off_t types, as they're less stable.
> the documentation change can break the api of an implementation,
> it is not weakening the spec.
Are you talking about the doc change from loff_t to off64_t? If so, I
agree that change invalidated the musl implementation. When I wrote "I
don't see any incompatibility with glibc and the changes I proposed" I
was talking about the patch proposed here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/31b53a8d-7cf4-b3a3-371f-a5723963383e@cs.ucla.edu/2-0001-off64_t-prefer-off_t-for-splice-etc.patch
As far as I can see, this proposed patch doesn't invalidate any
implementation. If it does invalidate one could you please give an
example call that follows the rules of the proposed patch but does not
work on glibc or on musl?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-01 23:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-28 17:53 [musl] " Rich Felker
2023-06-28 18:21 ` [musl] " Paul Eggert
2023-06-28 19:15 ` Rich Felker
2023-06-30 7:11 ` Paul Eggert
2023-06-30 8:02 ` [musl] Re: [libc-coord] " Jonathan Wakely
2023-06-30 8:14 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-06-30 8:30 ` Sam James
2023-06-30 19:44 ` Paul Eggert
2023-07-02 1:18 ` A. Wilcox
2023-07-02 19:21 ` Paul Eggert
2023-07-03 18:16 ` Jakub Wilk
2023-07-03 21:35 ` Paul Eggert
2023-07-08 17:03 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-07-09 6:07 ` [musl] [PATCH v4] off64_t: prefer off_t for splice, etc Paul Eggert
2023-07-09 6:16 ` [musl] Re: [libc-coord] " Sam James
2023-07-15 15:08 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-07-15 18:35 ` Rich Felker
2023-07-15 20:01 ` Paul Eggert
2023-07-16 0:35 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-07-16 0:39 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-06-30 23:37 ` [musl] Re: regression in man pages for interfaces using loff_t Rich Felker
2023-07-01 7:24 ` [musl] Re: [libc-coord] " Paul Eggert
2023-07-01 13:36 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2023-07-01 23:02 ` Paul Eggert [this message]
2023-07-01 14:32 ` Rich Felker
2023-07-01 18:45 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-07-01 23:06 ` Paul Eggert
2023-06-28 19:19 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2023-06-28 19:28 ` Rich Felker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=574389bd-7481-7192-d1ba-f4e62e34c358@cs.ucla.edu \
--to=eggert@cs.ucla.edu \
--cc=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=libc-coord@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=musl@lists.openwall.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/musl/
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).