Adding -l option to /bin/sh

There has been a bunch of discussion in various places, most recently as part of the PR xsrc/54851 about (amongst various other things) adding a -l option to sh. The option exists in many other shells - its purpose is to make the shell into a login shell (and hence can also be written -o login

Re: Adding ?

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 08:58:42PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 09:56:23AM +, nia wrote: > > The current situation in pkgsrc (where lots of software using alloca > > needs to be BUILDLINK_TRANSFORMED to use the -std=gnu... variant, or > > is patched to use the

Re: Adding ?

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 09:56:23AM +, nia wrote: > The current situation in pkgsrc (where lots of software using alloca > needs to be BUILDLINK_TRANSFORMED to use the -std=gnu... variant, or > is patched to use the builtin directly) is not really one I'm happy > with. For most software it is

Re: Adding ?

> If some software expects an but the base OS does not > provide it, then is it more useful to have a devel/alloca package > which can be buildlinked which would provide it? I'm not sure whether that can be done even in principle. I don't really understand alloca all that well, but my

Re: Adding ?

> needs to be BUILDLINK_TRANSFORMED to use the -std=gnu... variant, or > is patched to use the builtin directly) is not really one I'm happy > with. pkgsrc is used on more than just NetBSD; adding the file to NetBSD does not help on other operating systems.. iain

Re: Adding ?

I think there's several points of view: 1) Everything using alloca() is broken (valid, it's a nasty function) 2) Everything using extensions should properly declare it does so (using eg. -std=gnu99 and so on), and not use standards mode. 2) Software that makes certain assumptions about

Re: Adding ?

Date:Thu, 13 May 2021 16:00:56 -0700 From:John Nemeth Message-ID: <202105132300.14dn0uwz026...@server.cornerstoneservice.ca> | On May 13, 22:37, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: | } The source is wrong to request strict C++14 | } compatibility and then use an

Re: Adding ?

On May 13, 22:37, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: } On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 09:58:50PM +0200, Jaromír Doleček wrote: } > Le jeu. 13 mai 2021 à 21:44, Joerg Sonnenberger a écrit : } > > > No we don't, unless you are using PCC :D } > > > } > > > The block in only provides an alloca(3) prototype, and

Re: Adding ?

On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 09:58:50PM +0200, Jaromír Doleček wrote: > Le jeu. 13 mai 2021 à 21:44, Joerg Sonnenberger a écrit : > > > No we don't, unless you are using PCC :D > > > > > > The block in only provides an alloca(3) prototype, and only > > > if the compiler already #defines alloca as

Re: Adding ?

Le jeu. 13 mai 2021 à 21:44, Joerg Sonnenberger a écrit : > > No we don't, unless you are using PCC :D > > > > The block in only provides an alloca(3) prototype, and only > > if the compiler already #defines alloca as __builtin_alloca. > > > > While this works for gcc in some -std modes (e.g.

Re: Adding ?

; > > > > > e.g. MySQL 8.0.* seems to rely on this. > > > > > > > > We provide it in stdlib.h as long as a standard mode is not set. > > > > I don't see the point of adding alloca.h. > > > > > > We don't provide the builtin in stdli

Re: Adding ?

Le jeu. 13 mai 2021 à 12:58, Martin Husemann a écrit : > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:51:45PM +0200, Jaromír Dole?ek wrote: > > On the contrary, Linux explicitely #undefs alloca(), then > > #define alloca() as __builtin_alloca(), so it always works, regardless > > which -std. > > But isn't that

Re: Adding ?

On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:51:45PM +0200, Jaromír Dole?ek wrote: > On the contrary, Linux explicitely #undefs alloca(), then > #define alloca() as __builtin_alloca(), so it always works, regardless > which -std. But isn't that obviously wrong and our version the correct one? (Well, maybe we

Re: Adding ?

ote: > > > > would it be a bad thing to add a compatibility which would > > > > use the builtin alloca() instead of the libc one when available? > > > > > > > > e.g. MySQL 8.0.* seems to rely on this. > > > > > > We provide it i

Re: Adding ?

> > use the builtin alloca() instead of the libc one when available? > > > > > > e.g. MySQL 8.0.* seems to rely on this. > > > > We provide it in stdlib.h as long as a standard mode is not set. > > I don't see the point of adding alloca.h. > > We don't provide the builtin in stdlib.h. Yes, we do. Joerg

Re: Adding ?

t; > e.g. MySQL 8.0.* seems to rely on this. > > We provide it in stdlib.h as long as a standard mode is not set. > I don't see the point of adding alloca.h. We don't provide the builtin in stdlib.h. The definition in stdlib.h makes the app use the libc-provided alloca(), which is

Re: Adding ?

On Wed, 12 May 2021 08:38:39 +0200 Jaromír Doleček wrote: > e.g. MySQL 8.0.* seems to rely on this. > > Jaromir MySQL 8.0.* reports problems because they compile without extensions using -std=c++14 , if they used -std=gnu++14 it would work. Or the could use SET(CMAKE_CXX_STANDARD 14) and

Re: Adding ?

tandard mode is not set. I don't see the point of adding alloca.h. Joerg

Adding ?

Hi, would it be a bad thing to add a compatibility which would use the builtin alloca() instead of the libc one when available? e.g. MySQL 8.0.* seems to rely on this. Jaromir

Re: bin/pax: Adding support for base-256 (GNU-style) encoded file sizes

On 28.11.2018 18:25, Michał Górny wrote: > arcn->sb.st_gid = (gid_t)asc_u32(hd->gid, sizeof(hd->gid), OCT); > arcn->sb.st_size = (off_t)ASC_OFFT(hd->size, sizeof(hd->size), OCT); > + if (arcn->sb.st_size == -1) > + return -1; > arcn->sb.st_mtime =

adding additional names to propernames

Is there any rule for what names get added to share/dict/propernames? Would adding more names, even uncommon ones, be okay? -- Eitan Adler

Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 06:24:07PM +0200, Jan Danielsson wrote: >I don't know how complicated those web login-things generally are. > The one at the university didn't require a session; one could just > submit the form and it worked. If that's the norm, then it's pretty > trivial to write a

Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 09:34:08PM +0530, Utkarsh Anand wrote: > | for example people usally need $EDITOR other than vi/ed > > Has vi ever worked for anyone (in NetBSD)? I don't use anything but NetBSD's vi (I even install it on linux) -- Manuel Bouyer NetBSD: 26

Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

| There is 'x' in vi(1) to delete a character. Спасибо (Thanks)! That works! Regards, Utkarsh Anand

Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

> > Works just fine :-) I am typing on it right now. What does 'stty -a' > say on your terminal? speed 9600 baud; 67 rows; 240 columns; queue = 1024; line = termios; lflags: icanon isig iexten echo echoe -echok echoke -echonl echoctl -echoprt -altwerase -noflsh -tostop -flusho pendin -nokerninfo

Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

On Jul 6, 10:12pm, uanand...@gmail.com (Utkarsh Anand) wrote: -- Subject: Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience | speed 9600 baud; 67 rows; 240 columns; queue = 1024; line = termios; | lflags: icanon isig iexten echo echoe -echok echoke -echonl echoctl | -echoprt

Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 04:54:16PM +0100, Sevan Janiyan wrote: > On 06/07/2017 16:52, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 11:23:09AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote: > >> 1. A text browser in base. "lynx" or "links" come to mind, I don't > >>mind which, both are GPL2. > > No.

Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

On 07/06/17 17:23, Christos Zoulas wrote: [---] > Alas, because of network policy on the wifi network, I needed to enter > a code to access the network, and for that I needed a browser. We don't > ship a browser in base. > >>From the looks of it, a text browser would suffice (and it did), so > I

Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

On 06.07.2017 18:06, Christos Zoulas wrote: > On Jul 6, 9:34pm, uanand...@gmail.com (Utkarsh Anand) wrote: > -- Subject: Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience > > | Has vi ever worked for anyone (in NetBSD)? At least, for me, the backspace > | and de

Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

On 6 July 2017 at 08:52, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 11:23:09AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote: >> 1. A text browser in base. "lynx" or "links" come to mind, I don't >>mind which, both are GPL2. > > No. Seriously, no. Well, this is 2017, and not having any

Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

On Jul 6, 9:34pm, uanand...@gmail.com (Utkarsh Anand) wrote: -- Subject: Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience | Has vi ever worked for anyone (in NetBSD)? At least, for me, the backspace | and delete keys never work (this happens only with NetBSD). Would you

Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

On 06/07/2017 16:52, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 11:23:09AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote: >> 1. A text browser in base. "lynx" or "links" come to mind, I don't >>mind which, both are GPL2. > No. Seriously, no. > Could we ensure it's one of the available packages on

Re: adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

ction. My needs would would be satisfied if we could formalize and create a build cluster with daily pkgsrc packages for the newest stable release and/or -current. Hopefully for both. ** I don't like putting more stuff into the base distribution, it's already fat and most people don't need a lot

adding stuff to the base installation to make user experience better

Hello, Yesterday I installed netbsd-8 on an ancient dell latitude x1. For the most part the installation went fine, and I booted to a working system, with both X and networking working. NetBSD runs very nicely on it and it is quite fast :-) Alas, because of network policy on the wifi network, I

Re: Adding ftp to master.passwd and group

ete the easy setup of anon FTP server. Any objections to me adding > this? Since decades, "enabling ftpd" in /etc/inetd.conf means "enabling it for real users only". Enabling anonymous ftp is an additional, simple, well-documented step which needs to be consciously done by the