[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120413192018.1a7e3612@newbook>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 19:20:18 -0700
From: Isaac Dunham <idunham@...abit.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: compatability: struct sigaction missing sa_restorer
Kernel headers (asm/signal.h) and glibc headers agree that struct
sigaction should have sa_restorer; musl provides __sa_restorer
This is not mandated in X/Open or POSIX, AFAICT.
However, the specification says "struct sigaction includes at least the
following members", so here the glibc/kernel approach is conformant, as
well as being simple and obvious--as opposed to the possible approach:
#ifdef _GNU_SOURCE || _BSD_SOURCE
#define sa_restorer ....
#endif
This prevents building Xvesa; I definitely won't patch it to use
__sa_restorer. Don't know if sa_restorer is commonly used.
I think that's the last issue, but could be wrong.
As far as __[gu]id_t goes:
$ grep -r __[gu]id_t /usr/include|wc -l
101
So that's a fair-sized problem (sed already posted, fwiw).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
