Re: CVS commit: src/lib/libc/stdlib

[Matthias Scheler <tron%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 03:05:26PM +0200, Nicolas Joly wrote:
> One possibility could be to not free memory at all in setenv, but only
> with unsetenv.

I'm not convinced about that.

> IMHO, it's a programmer error to call setenv more than once on the
> same variable without a corresponding unsetenv in between (just like
> malloc()/free() behaviour).

Is there any standard which backs this statement?

> Otherwise, if i understand things
> correctly, it's more putenv that shoud work that way.

Our putenv(3) is implemented via setenv(3).

        Kind regards

-- 
Matthias Scheler                                  http://zhadum.org.uk/