On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:12 PM Rob Landley <r...@landley.net> wrote: > > On 10/04/2018 03:48 PM, enh wrote: > > yeah, and right now we have exactly one macro for which we need this... > > > > ...and an alternative fix would be to just drop the UUCP feature from > > getconf. GNU getconf doesn't support it (somewhat obviously), and > > Android is always going to say "no", and i'm not expecting a great > > UUCP renaissance any time soon where it suddenly becomes relevant > > again. > > Trimming the UUCP feature sounds fine to me, although I need to revisit the > whole mess of: > > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/getconf.html > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/sysconf.html > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/confstr.html > > At some point... > > Possibly what I need is an #ifdef/#else staircase for all those symbols in a > header file, which can be generated once from the actual posix spec and then > ignored. (I don't care about ugly in header files. I just don't want the data > in > two places that have to be kept in sync...)
i think that's overkill. we demonstrably don't have to care about anything outside the subset that GNU supports. (and in practice it seems like there are really only a tiny handful that are actually used.) i think my patch to add the pathconf variables is more useful --- there are real live instances of that in the AOSP build. note that i also have an orthogonal interest in going in the direction of my patches: if i'm going to move AOSP to toybox, i'll end up replicating your build scripts in soong. so as far as i'm concerned, the less that's done there, the better... > > (but i'm still interested to see that's even possible with the > > preprocessor. i've long believed it wasn't.) > > Preprocessor combined with the ? : operator working on a constant first > argument > so the test optimizes out, maybe? (If C11 or C18 had added _is_defined(x) and > macro_or_default(x, y) instead of all the useless nonsense it _did_ add, I'd > care a lot more about them...) > > But at the moment I'm tired after a long day of sitting in a cubicle and > trying > to work through company politics and history to figure out what (if anything) > the technical requirements for various Change Requests are, besides which I > shouldn't be thinking about this for another hour anyway. :) > > Rob _______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list Toybox@lists.landley.net http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net