Yo Achim! On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 22:54:43 +0200 Achim Gratz via devel <devel@ntpsec.org> wrote:
> Gary E. Miller via devel writes:
> >> In that case, you need to be prepared for changed semantics in
> >> several places and I don't think ntpsec is set up to deal with
> >> that.
> >
> > Changed semantics? No. Simple existence of the prototpe is at
> > stake.
>
> Go back to the original thread and/or read the manual page about
> strerror_r;
I was not talking about strerror_r(). I was talking about strnXXX()
and struct ifreq.
I'm well aware of that other issue.
> >> Well, if that's the ABI you are de-facto targeting, then make this
> >> the requirement.
> >
> > It is one of the choices. NTPsec, and gpsd, try to be flexible to
> > what is available, not the other way around.
>
> If you want to be flexible about bugs, don't call it NTPsec.
Not at all what I meant. Flexible about what NTPsec builds on, not
flexible about the end result.
> You already try to use both
Uh, not me white man.... Not my code.
> (as Hal likely found out already the hard way).
Yes, Hal is the one working on it. James also did a lot of work on
strerror_r(). I'm just staying out of their way.
> You will either need to provide your own implementation that resolves
> the differences (Gnulib-style)
I guess you have not looked at Hal's latest commit's. That is the
approach he took, to povide a shim.
RGDS
GARY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703
g...@rellim.com Tel:+1 541 382 8588
Veritas liberabit vos. -- Quid est veritas?
"If you can't measure it, you can't improve it." - Lord Kelvin
pgps8XBv8X3O1.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
