On Friday 02 March 2012 01:27:00 Ismael Luceno wrote: > On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 20:35:19 -0500 Rich Felker wrote: > > On the other hand, if you want to include 75% of the functional code > > needed for posix_spawn, why not go ahead and include the last 25% so > > that it actually works? > > Because worse is better. Today things will compile, tomorrow they will > work. I hope.
as Rich said, i don't see the point in adding a large chunk of code that, in the end, doesn't really implement things if you're just posting things that you don't intend to get merged, please include those details in the patch summary and/or body. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list uClibc@uclibc.org http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
