Re: Re: [UnixOS2] libc

Stefan Neis wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Andreas Buening wrote:
> 
> > This makes sense. A patch should contain of
> >
> > - a ChangeLog entry (who did what and when)
> > - a short description (why and what)
> > - the patch itself
> > - the updated docs (if necessary)
> > - the updated Makefile (if necessary; can also be done by someone else
> >   if the contributor of the patch doesn't know how to do it).
> 
> You do realize that it would take decades to incorporate all the missing
> functions from Posix/2 that way, don't you?

I realize that this would require a lot of work. Neither do I expect
that we just have to do copy&paste from posix/2 nor do I expect that
you do all the work. The current problem is that even a one-line-change
is a long-term and basically undoable project. If we get the stage
that everbody can apply patches instead of writing his own emx clone
then we've already made huge progress. Im my opinion the idea is that
necessary functions are added by people who need them. If nobody adds
a specific function then it's obviously not urgently needed. Then we
can discuss those functions later. I also had a lot of stuff I'd like
to see in emx and I'll have no moral problems to grab some code from
posix/2. ;-)


> I guess, that's the point where I definitely loose interest in doing the
> project this way (or even at all, actually, though that later part might
> change once I calm down again).

So calm down, please. :-)


Bye,
Andreas