On Friday 30 August 2002 11:22, Wichmann, Mats D wrote: > > On Friday 30 August 2002 10:57, Wichmann, Mats D wrote: > > > - patches for "nice", which are not glibc cvs, and > > > were also controversial with Debian for compatibility > > > reasons > > > > care to explain this one better? > > This is the stuff designed to make nice follow the > SUS spec: > > RETURN VALUE > Upon successful completion, nice() returns the new nice value > minus [NZERO]. Otherwise, -1 is returned, the process' nice > value is not changed, and errno is set to indicate the error. > > This is not the same as traditional Linux nice has done, > where 0 indicates success and -1 failure. > > Someone from Debian has objected to this change being > required in case something depends on the old behavior. > > The patch is described on the LSB Testing FAQ page: > > http://www.linuxbase.org/test/lsb-runtime-test-faq.html > > as fixes for T.nice 7,8. That patch is incomplete; > the other piece of it is that a stub > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/nice.c must be added which > contains only "#include <sysdeps/unix/nice.c>" > so that the glibc build system will pick it up > in a build-for-Linux.
I see. Well is the LSB going to force distribution change? Do we want to run the risk of breaking existing code? This sounds like a policy decision.
