Date: Sun, 08 Jun 1997 02:30:51 +1000 From: David Nugent <davidn@unique.usn.blaze.net.au> To: Tom <tom@uniserve.com>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Use of your strptime(3) code (fwd) Message-ID: <199706071630.CAA27373@unique.usn.blaze.net.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 05 Jun 1997 14:49:01 MST." <Pine.BSF.3.96.970605144649.11498A-100000@shell.uniserve.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>> Because in 2.0b6, the author removed the requirement for a system >>> strptime(3) call. Still, this situtation may come up again, so I offered >>> it as something to add to libc/libcompat. >> >> Again, with the existing copyright, it's simply unacceptable. I'm >> saying this for at least the third time now, but didn't get any >> response so far. > > Also, I don't think we need it. None of the hundreds of other ports > need it, and as it seems neither does msql. By the same token, we don't "need" anything in libc which isn't a system call, right? I mean, why not have apps do it all themselves? :-) Ok, perhaps this is a little too sarcastic, but there have been two instances in the last couple of months where I could have used a strptime(). pw(8), for example, could make use of it. It currently doesn't "need" strptime() because it uses a different longhand method, but if it was available in libc, it would *certainly* use it. Same probably goes for anything that needs to parse a date/time. It is a common enough need to put it into libc, imho. Other UNIX vendors including NetBSD obviously think so too. Regards, David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199706071630.CAA27373>