On 8 November 2019 23:26:48 CET, Alistair Francis <[email protected]> wrote: >On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 09:17 +0100, walter harms wrote: >> Your are right but so far i understand >> the idea here is to have a replacement when >> a programm demands stime(). > >Thanks! Do I need to do anything else or is this going to be merged?
The main argument is that SUS does not specify stime() AFAIR. Apart from that: bloat-o-meter stats? Compare your v1 to a possibly beneficial xclock_settime(&ts) bloat-o-meter version? Thanks, _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
