NetBSD-Bugs archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: bin/38327: uu{en,de}code - any reason to use non-portable [sg]etprogname?
The following reply was made to PR bin/38327; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Alan Barrett <apb%cequrux.com@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc:
Subject: Re: bin/38327: uu{en,de}code - any reason to use non-portable
[sg]etprogname?
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 13:57:44 +0200
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008, cheusov%tut.by@localhost wrote:
> There are some problems in compiling NetBSD versions of uuencode and
> uudecode utilities under other OSes (I need it under Linux) because
> these utilities are not portable enough. Non-portable setprogname(3)
> and getprogname(3) functions are used. I think there is no reason for
> this.
Use of set/getprogname is recommended by NetBSD's style guide
(src/share/misc/style), in order to increase portability. They replace
unportable uses of the __progname symbol, which is set by NetBSD's
default program startup code before caling main(). It's unlikely that
any NetBSD programs that use set/getprogname() will be changed to avoid
them.
Instead, I suggest that you use or adapt the implementation of
set/getprogname from src/tools/compat/setprogname.c.
--apb (Alan Barrett)
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index |
Old Index