James Carlson wrote: > Felix Schulte writes: > > On 6/25/06, Casper.Dik at sun.com <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote: > > > This seems wrong; personally I think we should rip out any replacement > > > for system libraries; such duplication leads to more code which needs > > > to be maintained. This includes replacements for <stdio.h>. > > There would be no need to replace it if the stdio implementation in > > Solaris would be sane, however since it sucks a faster, non-sucking > > replacement would be cool. > > In that case, the right answer is to remove the "sucking" part of the > Solaris stdio. Since stdio is part of Open Solaris, this is doable. [snip] > Forking off and restarting is not proper maintenance.
See my other posting (http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss/2006-June/000454.html) about what the /usr/include/ast/stdio.h header is for. libast's "sfio" I/O functioanlity is very different from stdio for a couple of reasons. On top of that a "compatibilty" layer was added to emulate some of the stdio API behaviour. > > > (The problem is even bigger if these are indeed shipped as part of > > > the ksh libraries; having multiple implementations visible to processes > > > is bad; note that re-exporting symbols like fopen() would be blatantly > > > illegal in C and therefor also in Solaris; our libraries will malfunction > > > when they find a different stdio library) > > No, they won't malfunction. All AST stdio symbols have an '_ast_' > > prefix in their ELF name, for example fopen() is listed as _ast_fopen > > by elfdump > > That doesn't make it any less awful. Uhm... why ? ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
