[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Bug-zile] OT: gnulib vs libposix [Was Re: Incremental search is dog slo

From: Gary V. Vaughan
Subject: [Bug-zile] OT: gnulib vs libposix [Was Re: Incremental search is dog slow in moderately-sized files]
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:05:03 +1300

On Jan 19, 2014, at 10:00 PM, Reuben Thomas <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 19 January 2014 08:54, Gary V. Vaughan <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On Jan 19, 2014, at 9:49 PM, Reuben Thomas <address@hidden> wrote:
>> >> I still strongly advocate libposix as a shim between applications that 
>> >> stick to posix apis and libc - avoiding adding thousands of lines of 
>> >> configury and gnulib sources to every project.
>> >
>> > Eh? It's supposed to be a library! You don't add it to every project!
>> Run on sentence, sorry.  I meant to say that a libposix shim shared by 
>> everything is preferable to adding gnulib configury and fallback function 
>> implementations to every project.
> Exactly, so by the same logic you might as well build all of "libgnu", not 
> just the POSIX APIs. The libc maintainers would be bound to agree!

Ah, I see what you mean.  Well that would be preferable to the big fat nothing 
we have right now.  I'll have to try it out, and see how well it works -- 
there's a couple of gotchas in the split between library and application 
modules, and also LGPL vs GPL licensing incompatibilities.  On the TODO list :)

In a perfect world, teaching people to stick to the POSIX apis if humanly 
possibly would be better for general portability of GNU software though.

Gary V. Vaughan (gary AT gnu DOT org)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]