[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] Correct typo in comment in fts.c
From: |
James Youngman |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Correct typo in comment in fts.c |
Date: |
Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:45:44 +0000 |
On Feb 20, 2008 12:12 PM, Jim Meyering <address@hidden> wrote:
> This reminds me of the long-planned fork, e.g., s/fts_*/gfts_*/,
> (all public symbols) in which I create new files named gfts.[ch]. Then,
> someday, I can propose adding it to glibc. Remember, proposing the
> addition with new names is the only way to add the improved functions
> to glibc, due to the API changes that make the gnulib version more robust.
I'm looking forward to collaborating on that.
> A couple months ago I finally did most of the work, and have adapted
> coreutils to use the new names (still all private for the moment).
> Just need to find time to write ChangeLog entries, etc. and decide how
> to handle maintenance of the resulting duplication. I'm leaning toward
> deriving gfts.c mechanically, at least initially, but that's messy.
> There are many exceptions, and evaluating that takes time, too.
I should point out that Martin has been finding that the fts-based
find exhibits different behaviour to the non-fts find on file systems
with a Sun Solaris automounter. We don't yet have details of what, in
particular, is different about what the fts based version is doing.
However, he noted that --disable-leaf-optimisation doesn't have any
effect on the fts-based find executable. Details (and a patch which
appears actually to not solve the problem, somewhat to my surprise) at
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?22301.
Thanks,
James.