Re: Re: [UnixOS2] libc

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Ilya Zakharevich wrote:

> I repeat: this makes no sense.  Most cases where one *can* be fully
> compatible are already in EMX.
str(n)casecmp, usleep, nanosleep, special cases of almost any mathematical
function are just the exceptions I can think of within the first 15
seconds and without having a list of functions before my eyes.

> If ./configure is able to detect that something is missing, then it
> should be able to substitute something else (otherwise why check for
> it)?

Sure. But what is it supposed to do if e.g. both usleep and nanosleep
are missing? Typically, you get a link error after compiling for a couple
of hours. Great.

> Hope this helps (and sorry that this discussion looks as directed
> personally at you),

I'm taking it that way since I seem to be the only one interested in
integrating the results of Posix/2 projects into libcNG. But it's way to
much work for a single person with rather limited time (and -even worse
- limited knowledge about all the internals) to do all those things that
you consider to be necessary. So I'll just have to stay with libc + add-on
library (and yes, it was really easy to recompile gcc.exe to add cExt to
the list of libraries to be used to make configure happy, but I really 
would have appreciated to not be forced to waste my time with this). But
then, I don't care much about debugging EMX DLL's as I can override any
buggy function with a different implementation, anyway.

	Regards,
		Stefan
-- 
Micro$oft is not an answer. It is a question. The answer is 'no'.