Re: [RFC] sethostname handling patch series

[Bruno Haible]

Hi Ben,

> The only point I'm not clear on is the note about using a fixed size
> array allocation instead of the dynamic one.  Is it acceptable to use
> HOST_NAME_MAX + 1 to achieve a size that is known to the compiler at
> compile time

Yes. Stack allocations are OK up to a size of ca. 4096. HOST_NAME_MAX
is 64 or 255 or 256 on all known systems, and it wouldn't make sense
to make it longer than 1000.

> Each patch should also update Changlog as well, correct?

Yes, but you can also send the ChangeLog entry separately from the patch
(in the same mail, as a copy&paste), if that's simpler for you.

> I think that
> the patch to add test-sethostname would be best as a fourth patch
> since it can't be used until the unistd integration is done.

Yes, I do it the same way: First the patch that adds new functionality,
then the unit test. Of course, during development, I create both together.
But separating them in the proposal and in the commits makes the review
easier.

Bruno
-- 
In memoriam Alfred Herrhausen <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Herrhausen>