Re: [PATCH v12 5/6] Documentation to the above changes (bug 10871).

[Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak at lingonborough dot com>]

15.01.2018 09:30 Rical Jasan <ricaljasan@pacific.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 01/14/2018 10:28 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> > On 01/14/2018 07:42 PM, Rical Jasan wrote:
> >> It seems odd not to have ABALTMON_*. Unfortunately I didn't get to
> >> reviewing this sooner, and I don't want to block this, and another
> >> developer has OK'd it [1], but I wanted to throw in my 2 cents.
> > I asked the same thing during the review, see:
> > https://www.sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-01/msg00408.html
> >
> > There is no reason we can't add it in the future.
> >
> > Perhaps a note about this in the documentation might explain
> > why the expected define is not present?
>
> That would be fine with me. I think it deserves a mention because the
> feature is implemented, and I imagine anybody taking advantage of the
> bugfix or using %OB, et al., will naturally be interested in, if not
> looking for, the abbreviated equivalent. Better to have complete
> documentation that gets updated later than no documentation at all.

Again, as we are short of time I'll appreciate a complete excerpt of
the documentation which I can just copy & paste.  Or maybe better please
polish the documentation later after I commit so you will get a full
credit in the commit message and a changelog entry. :-)

> Should the full _NL_ABALTMON list be documented alongside ALTMON, or do
> you think another paragraph in the ALTMON description is a sufficient
> shim? If ABALTMON is expected to be added in 2.28 because of how close
> to the 2.27 release this went in, I'd prefer the latter, perhaps even
> with a note that ABALTMON is expected to supersede the
> currently-available _NL_ABALTMON, but if ABALTMON is intended to be
> deferred until standardization, I think the former is more appropriate,
> with no mention of ABALTMON.

No, please don't defer this to 2.28.  This set of patches has missed
about 2 release deadlines already and I think it deserves to be included
in some new releases of major Linux distros which I expect to be released
this year.  Regarding the POSIX standardization, since ALTMON_* has been
accepted in ~2010 and is still not yet published I assume that ABALTMON_*
will remain waiting another ~10 years (I'm trying not to be ironic,
having worked on the issue for just glibc for about 2.5 years I really
understand the hard work beyond standardization.)

Regards,

Rafal