Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> Sheldon Hearn once wrote:
> > > : 3. Send patches.
> > > 
> > > And I certainly don't care enough to do that!-)
> > So, what? You're just arguing for fun? If so, then you and everyone
> > else doing like wise can just piss the hell off.
> I, for one, was arguing because I saw a number of people ask about
> this over the last years.
> Instead of being told "sorry, we do not comply with this part of
> ANSI standard for reasons such and such", this people were told
> how they have to be better sysadmins and what not.
> This time around, it took several days of a long thread for somebody
> to admit _the problem exists_.

Then, submit your patches to fix the problem preferably with a knob
to turn your patches on/off.  From the discussion, I hope you're prepared
to deal with the following scenario:

  User:    I compiled malloc with -DSTRICT_ANSI.  Now my system appears
           sluggish and I can't run as many processes because of
           memory/swap starvation.  

  Mikhail: Well, malloc() conforms to the ANSI C standard.  You need to
           buy more memory and a real big disk drive for swap space.
           Or, you could run fewer processes.

  User:    But, if I compile malloc without -DSTRICT_ANSI, then everything
           seems to work.

  Mikhail: Well, that is silly because now your malloc doesn't conform
           to the ANSI C standard.  You should not use a nonconforming
           OS for programming.

Submit your patches to the documentation pointing out the alleged
shortcomings malloc() and friends.

Meanwhile, visit /usr/ports.



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to