Re: [Nmh-workers] Garbage collection

[Anthony J. Bentley]

Jerrad Pierce writes:
> >Wow, ok ... I didn't think anyone used that, but I stand corrected.  It
> >looks like what we did for OpenBSD was simply make rcvtty not work.  Are
> >you fine with that?  I'm not really interested in dealing with OpenBSD's
> >brokenness here.
> Fine with me, I usually run some flavor of Linux.
> 
> Although it does seem odd that only a particular variant of BSD is having
> issues, in which case I suppose it might be fair to chalk it up to the system,
> document it, and forget about it until somebody cares enough to fix it...

The "brokenness" is that OpenBSD simply doesn't implement utmpx, because
it's seen as an unsafe and insecure interface. OpenBSD aren't the only ones
who feel this way (the musl C library also doesn't support utmpx, for the
same reasons: http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2012/03/04/4).

As far as I know the behavior of the utmpx functions are not defined by
POSIX either. I just checked and musl implements them as empty stubs. By
the letter of the standard that seems to be a compliant implementation.

--
Anthony J. Bentley