On 09.08.2019 19:04, Paul Goyette wrote: > > > On Fri, 9 Aug 2019, Christos Zoulas wrote: > >> I think we should do something right now (even for NetBSD-9) to avoid >> causing pain upstream. Even the variadic change is an improvement. I >> was just arguing that if we were going to make the change, let's go >> all the way and fix it properly, but if people feel that there is a >> chance for upstream to adopt the printflike setname_np() (I don't), >> let's go for it. > > Agreed on both points: > > * Fix ASAP (now) I disagree here. > * It seems unlikely for upstream to adopt our current API > Do you mean upstream 3rd party projects reusing our current API? This is false as everybody that builds or targets NetBSD picks it without questions.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature