From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/5063
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: M Farkas-Dyck <strake888@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general
Subject: Re: __xmknod, __sysv_signal
Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 11:55:48 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL3m8eAoSqZ_22G-WXWL4EDCu-WvCmn_k-MLOiHL1B7igy5Yuw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL3m8eBHheDR-rFHfuSXyJ7qUyjUCYw09oOfoMzAkYrxFiUU6g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140419025204.GS26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
	<CAL3m8eAubOeNBFt75L1HdKdksuM=kYpwE6Zyx4gzTwfYYOsh6Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140501003228.GQ26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1399398310 20160 80.91.229.3 (6 May 2014 17:45:10 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 17:45:10 +0000 (UTC)
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Original-X-From: musl-return-5070-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Tue May 06 19:45:04 2014
Return-path: <musl-return-5070-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>
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 <musl-return-5070-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>)
	id 1Whiev-0001vE-Hr
	for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 18:56:01 +0200
Original-Received: (qmail 13339 invoked by uid 550); 6 May 2014 16:56:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
Original-Received: (qmail 13331 invoked from network); 6 May 2014 16:56:00 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=aYglj3ace38gt0Bk+ioilVwuWUPkEs2/onvdecJ3Ivw=;
        b=KvkOXh8oEkx0mZpqgXQMTf1mHPb6BWdoAOGkUN87TUsxvQUxRWxJRkiklty1zGUZxb
         xGq4qvIH1tXtO9qx019YzVNX7BAY+prR/HWfryXuVhzihGR4m2gctZ65Pc09bROnfyrB
         Cua9VETPWr4lCHmS5DUxQtKXiTN4XQAyKNy7dgcvqx4pnWwrqtfrBn6fidpfbdBeHLi8
         Vv7fUlgGcVk3Kdy6yGK/l0ksYyTNn6ToSzlcXJwGQf6T/nM3HSJ8U1tL/pyXiHsWQd9W
         E7zARM5WVvPNYBeJnkA6wwxtJAWK5P97Om3JWnFXPczVM1IcTvWmeawtRb3rq78kHnyd
         k5cw==
X-Received: by 10.194.62.210 with SMTP id a18mr7118559wjs.4.1399395348569;
 Tue, 06 May 2014 09:55:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20140501003228.GQ26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:5063
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/5063>

On 30/04/2014, Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org> wrote:
> Sorry for taking a while to review this. I'd like to get it committed,
> but a few questions...

Ah, wasn't sure whether you meant to do this.

>> +int __xmknod(int ver, const char *path, mode_t mode, dev_t *dev)
>> +{
>> +	return mknod (path, mode, dev);
>> +}
>
> I think this should be *dev or something; mknod takes dev_t, not
> dev_t*.

Yes, that seems a typo in [1].

> Also I don't really like having this in src/stat, but we don't really
> have a dedicated place for ABI-compat junk yet...

I don't like it either.

What is musl's general policy on ABI compat? The FAQ says solely that
"musl aims for a degree of feature-compatibility", not what degree. Is
full binary compatibility with glibc the goal?

If we mean to include such, we ought to choose where to keep the code first.

[1] http://refspecs.linuxbase.org/LSB_3.1.1/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/baselib---xmknod-1.html