Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 03:58:57AM -0800, Thomas E. Spanjaard wrote:Fix a bug in our confstr(3) implementation, it did not conform to POSIX 1003.2. It returned -1 for errors where it should have returned 0.SUS != POSIX 1003.2
I was under the impression confstr(3) was baggage from POSIX 1003.2 ('92) and as such also ended up in SUS; I however have much like you no access to POSIX docs (or do I? I'll have to see what the uni has...). Do you suggest I change the comments and manpage to reflect SUSv3 rather than POSIX 1003.2 until it is ascertained to conform to POSIX 1003.2?
Cheers,
--
Thomas E. Spanjaard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
