On Mar 2 21:35, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Mar 2 12:45, Brian Inglis wrote:
> > On 2022-03-02 01:25, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > Hi Brian,
> > >
> > > On Mar 1 13:20, Brian Inglis wrote:
> > > > Interested in a patch for sysconf.cc to return:
> > > >
> > > > _SC_TZNAME_MAX => TZNAME_MAX and
> > > > _SC_MONOTONIC_CLOCK => _POSIX_MONOTONIC_CLOCK?
> > >
> > > not sure I understand the question. Both are already implemented.
> > >
> > > $ getconf -a | egrep '(TZNAME_MAX|MONOTONIC_CLOCK)'
> > > _POSIX_TZNAME_MAX 6
> > > TZNAME_MAX undefined
> > > _POSIX_MONOTONIC_CLOCK 200809
> >
> > Sorry, must have been looking at very *OLD* version online, as
> > _SC_CLOCK_SELECTION and _SC_MONOTONIC_CLOCK were not defined.
> >
> > Why did you not define _SC_TZNAME_MAX => _POSIX_TZNAME_MAX when you tweaked
> > it?
>
> Because it's wrong. _POSIX_TZNAME_MAX is just a minimum value required
> by POSIX, not the correct value to return for TZNAME_MAX.
>
> > My rereading of the man and POSIX pages leads me to believe that for all
> > known values of _SC_... the entries now showing {nsup, {c:0}} should be
> > {cons, {c:-1L}} supported but undefined, and only out of range values for
> > the parameter should be treated as {nsup, {c:-1L}}?
>
> These are really not undefined, but not supported on Cygwin. That's
> why they return with EINVAL. I see what you mean, though, let me think
> about it.
Yep, I guess you're right. I compared this with what Linux returns
for the unsupported tracing options. See commits cf00bba99a61 and
fcec4830abf0.
Thanks,
Corinna
