On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 07:32:06PM +0200, shmuel siegel wrote:
On 1/29/2010 4:50 AM, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 01/28/2010 09:32 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
What is considered the best practice for packaging a program that uses
strlcpy()?
Besides patching it to not use strlcpy?
On 1/29/2010 4:50 AM, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 01/28/2010 09:32 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
What is considered the best practice for packaging a program that uses
strlcpy()?
Besides patching it to not use strlcpy? :)
Is there a reason (from a programming point of view) to avoid
On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 23:38 -0800, Eric Smith wrote:
Tom spot Callaway wrote:
You could probably package up libbsd for inclusion:
http://libbsd.freedesktop.org/wiki/
That's exactly the kind of thing I was hoping to find. I've submitted a
package for review:
Eric Smith wrote:
What is considered the best practice for packaging a program that uses
strlcpy()?
Is there a Fedora library that provides strlcpy() and friends?
Should I add an implmentation of strlcpy() to the package as an
additional source or patch?
Should I modify the program to not
On 01/28/2010 09:32 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
What is considered the best practice for packaging a program that uses
strlcpy()?
Besides patching it to not use strlcpy? :)
Is there a Fedora library that provides strlcpy() and friends?
Besides glib, no. You could probably package up libbsd for
Tom spot Callaway wrote:
You could probably package up libbsd for inclusion:
http://libbsd.freedesktop.org/wiki/
That's exactly the kind of thing I was hoping to find. I've submitted a
package for review:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559856
Thanks!
Eric
--
devel mailing
