On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 1:21 PM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 12:59 PM Eshan Dhawan <eshandhawa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I went through the implementations in FreeBSD, NetBSD and musl >> they all require fork(). >> So they can't be used by RTEMS. > > > Read https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/wordexp.html > and see > that it even includes an example of how you could implement this using forking > echo and using pipes to capture the output. > It's not required though. We can do a clean implementation of it without fork, and provide some use case with RTEMS shell. This would be a nice bit of coding work for GSoC beyond porting/fixup. I'd strongly encourage it.
> I'm open to ideas on a small string to put in the Compliance spreadsheet to > mark > methods that we will never support. All of the posix_spawn() and this fall > into that > category. This would help avoid this analysis happening again. > > And once we figure that out, I hope I can figure out the magic in the Python > script > that generates the document from the spreadsheet. :) > > Gedare.. do you think we should add a section to the POSIX Users Guide on > Unsupportable Methods? Not full man pages but maybe a subsection per header > file with unsupportable methods, the list of methods and some rationale? > Wouldn't hurt. It'll take some doing though, and isn't appropriate as a GSoC milestone but could be a side-contribution. >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 11:17 PM Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Eshan, >>> >>> We can work with the newlib community. Some things can be done in >>> newlib that are only for RTEMS, while some things we should share with >>> others, and still more code may be not useable by RTEMS (e.g., what is >>> in sys/linux). It is best to try to make common code available, but if >>> some code has to be specialized for RTEMS differently than how it >>> works in other systems then we can do that. >>> >>> Gedare >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 11:06 AM Eshan Dhawan <eshandhawa...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > I will check the musl for a more RTEMS supported implementation. >>> > but will newlib change the implementation?? >>> > >>> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 8:26 PM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Sun, Mar 22, 2020 at 2:00 PM Eshan Dhawan <eshandhawa...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> I have also checked wordexp.h is completely present in newlib >>> >>> (libc/include) >>> >>> the implementation of the functions wordexp.c and wordfree.c is in >>> >>> (libc/posix) >>> >>> But the compliance status shows not supported. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> I don't see them in libc.a for the sparc: >>> >> >>> >> lib_a-wordexp.o: >>> >> >>> >> lib_a-wordfree.o: >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> It is not included in RTEMS because the newlib implementation requires >>> >> multiple >>> >> processes. It uses fork() and pipes. >>> >> >>> >> Maybe MUSCL has an implementation that is embedded friendly but the >>> >> compliance >>> >> guide is correct. >>> >> >>> >> --joel >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 11:31 PM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2020, 8:47 AM Eshan Dhawan <eshandhawa...@gmail.com> >>> >>>> wrote: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Hello everyone >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> I went through the POSIX Compliance guide and it showed that >>> >>>>> wcsncasecmp_l () was not supported in wchar.h >>> >>>>> But when I checked newlib it had been implemented in libc/string >>> >>>>> so I think it needs to be updated in the docs. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Thanks for spotting this. I did a spot check and think there were a >>> >>>> few more wc* methods that were not in the spreadsheet. I am going to >>> >>>> post a patch in a bit. Please check it. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Obviously, this is a csv file maintained externally in a spreadsheet. >>> >>>> If you put it in a spreadsheet, you can turn on data filtering based >>> >>>> on the top row. Then you can do "queries" to do things like filter >>> >>>> down to what's in a single header file. Or what's required in one >>> >>>> standard but not in another. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> FWIW this turned into a bit of a rat hole. I tried to double check the >>> >>>> newlib git repo and the link on their website is wrong after the >>> >>>> upgrade of sourceware.org. Then checked gdb and it had the same issue. >>> >>>> This resulted in also reporting some leftover cleanup from the recent >>> >>>> upgrade of sourceware.org. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Thanks >>> >>>>> Eshan >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > devel mailing list >>> > devel@rtems.org >>> > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
