This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [libc-alpha] Re: Wish for 2002 ...
- From: "Martin v. Loewis" <martin at v dot loewis dot de>
- To: spstarr at sh0n dot net
- Cc: kaz at ashi dot footprints dot net, libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 23:27:33 +0100
- Subject: Re: [libc-alpha] Re: Wish for 2002 ...
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.40.0201131703080.5107-100000@coredump.sh0n.net>
> I'm just arguing that if for example all the "other" *BSDs, unixes or
> whatever have you decide to include say strblowup() and the GNU C library
> doesn't. Won't that make us look like fools for not supporting
> it. EVEN THOUGH it hasn't (yet) been adopted by the POSIX standards body?
No. If people find that they cannot run the most recent FOOBAR
application because strblowup is not supported, *that* may make us
look like fools - atleast if enough people care about running FOOBAR.
Of course, that won't happen: If FOOBAR is free software, somebody
will contribute a patch to provide a portable strblowup to the FOOBAR
maintainers, along with enough configuration magic to determine the
system strblowup where available. In addition, other people will
produce a libstrblowup.so.
Notice how many GNU packages incorporate a complete gettext
installation. Nobody sees it as a problem that many problems
(including various BSDs) still do not provide a gettext implementation
in the C library, even though it is in wide use.
Regards,
Martin