Re: popen binary mode patch

[Eric Blake]

According to Eric Blake on 2/22/2010 4:29 PM:
> According to Bruce Korb on 2/22/2010 3:50 PM:
>>> The question, though, is whether cygwin's extension is useful enough to
>>> push on all platforms.  Gnulib tends to favor glibc extensions rather than
>>> cygwin extensions.  In other words, it is hard to justify replacing a
>>> glibc function that is perfectly standards-compliant.
>>
>> My philosophy is slightly different.  I prefer to go with whatever it is
>> that makes life easier for programming to multiple platforms.
> 
> http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11312

Unfortunately, Uli rejected it today.

> 
> We'll see if others agree with your argument, or whether it is just
> simpler to fix the caller.  I'd prefer to wait for some feedback from the
> glibc folks before doing anything in gnulib.

Given that Uli outright rejected the proposal of supporting popen(,"rb"),
does anyone else think it is worth changing gnulib to unilaterally declare
that glibc's popen is deficient (perhaps by adding a new module
popen-binary, so that those worried only about POSIX compliance don't have
to pick up on the bloat), or is this a case where sharutils should just
get used to writing popen(,O_BINARY?"rb":"r")?

-- 
Eric Blake   address@hidden    +1-801-349-2682
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature