[systemd-bugs] [Bug 73729] udev fails to build with uclibc

[bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73729

Nico Nelson <nico.nelson-91c8b80 at yopmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|WONTFIX                     |---

--- Comment #17 from Nico Nelson <nico.nelson-91c8b80 at yopmail.com> ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> (In reply to comment #15)
> > well, then at least close it with WONTFIX.
> 
> Whatever it takes...

yes, that would have done it, if it wasn't for your comment below - and it
seems one cannot reply without reopening, and as can't leave that comment
as-is, i have to reopen...

> 
> > that uclibc doesnt implement 100% of glibcs idiotic add-ons is definitely
> > not a bug.
> 
> The locale_t bits are POSIX btw. And "%m" and "secure_getenv()" are
> certainly not idiotic. %m is a nice way to deal with the thread-unsafety of
> strerror(). 

strerror() is not thread-unsafe when implemented properly (i.e. just returning
a pointer to a readonly string). it's not uclibc's fault if glibc doesn't do
so.

> And "secure_getenv()" solves serious security problems with
> handling environment variables.
> 
> I mean, thigns are not "idiotic" just because uclibc doesn't implement them.
> Maybe the thread and security issues don't matter to you, but they certainly
> do matter to us.

well, the idiotic bit is for example if strerror() is implemented by copying
const strings to a static buffer instead of just returning the const string
itself. however i highly doubt that glibc does so.
so you're basically fixing an inexistant problem by using hacks - bravo!

> > but it's definitely a bug that you refuse to continue supporting uclibc for
> > the UDEV subset of systemd, even though in your merge announcement you
> > promised that for that part nothing will change and ppl can just continue to
> > use it as if it were not part of systemd.
> 
> I don't see where we promised compatibility with non-glibc anywhere...

the message of the announcement is basically "calm down, you can continue using
udev as if nothing changed". however it doesn't mention that it will become
glibc-only.

> 
> Anyway, closing again, I hope this time you won're reopen it.

yeah, if you can refrain from making misleading comments when you close it
again.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-bugs/attachments/20140117/58076bb8/attachment.html>