On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Bruno Haible br...@clisp.org wrote:
Paul Eggert wrote:
On 06/12/2012 04:21 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
perhaps we can follow the suggestion and
replace if (freadahead (f)) with if (freading(f) !feof(f)) in
closein.c.
Yes, thanks, I like this idea the best
On 06/23/2012 08:10 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
However, in the case of close_stdin, is this important for something
that happens rarely
I tend to agree that it's not that important, but isn't
this question moot now that freadahead has been ported
to musl? (And welcome back from vacation)
Paul Eggert wrote:
On 06/12/2012 04:21 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
perhaps we can follow the suggestion and
replace if (freadahead (f)) with if (freading(f) !feof(f)) in
closein.c.
Yes, thanks, I like this idea the best of those suggested so far.
Here's a proposed patch to gnulib.
Il 08/06/2012 12:19, Pedro Alves ha scritto:
Have you any plans to address these problems? In particular, it does
seem odd to place a burden on libc authors of porting gnulib to it,
rather than just not supporting those functions which require
non-standard APIs on such libc's.
I've heard
On 06/12/2012 05:21 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 08/06/2012 12:19, Pedro Alves ha scritto:
Have you any plans to address these problems? In particular, it does
seem odd to place a burden on libc authors of porting gnulib to it,
rather than just not supporting those functions which require
Il 12/06/2012 14:14, Eric Blake ha scritto:
While I agree with this, perhaps we can follow the suggestion and
replace if (freadahead (f)) with if (freading(f) !feof(f)) in
closein.c.
freading() is just as much an extension as freadahead(), but it might be
an easier extension to implement.
On 8 June 2012 11:19, Pedro Alves pal...@redhat.com wrote:
I've heard such rants as well. The rants are IMO, misdirected. For instance,
IIRC, gnulib's freadahead use is caused by musl's printf not being posix
compliant, causing gnulib to pull in its printf replacement, which doesn't
work
On 06/07/2012 12:14 PM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
Someone just wrote a rant in a bug report for a program I maintain
about gnulib being the cause of many portability problems. I tracked
it down to the points raised here:
http://www.etalabs.net/musl/faq.html
Have you any plans to address these
Someone just wrote a rant in a bug report for a program I maintain
about gnulib being the cause of many portability problems. I tracked
it down to the points raised here:
http://www.etalabs.net/musl/faq.html
Have you any plans to address these problems? In particular, it does
seem odd to place a
