From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Oct 29 13: 2:23 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB00B14BD8 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:02:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA28241 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 22:02:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id WAA40856 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 22:02:17 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mail.tvol.com (mail.wgate.com [38.219.83.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B2E114BD8 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:01:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rjesup@wgate.com) Received: from jesup.eng.tvol.net (jesup.eng.tvol.net [10.32.2.26]) by mail.tvol.com (8.8.8/8.8.3) with ESMTP id PAA11867 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 15:56:55 -0400 (EDT) Reply-To: Randell Jesup To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: stpcpy() References: <19991029132257.A535@holly.calldei.com> <19991029111352.A87934@dragon.nuxi.com> <19991029132257.A535@holly.calldei.com> <199910291829.MAA89401@harmony.village.org> <19991029134549.B535@holly.calldei.com> From: Randell Jesup Date: 29 Oct 1999 15:58:14 +0000 In-Reply-To: Chris Costello's message of "Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:45:49 -0500" Message-ID: X-Mailer: Gnus v5.6.43/Emacs 20.4 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Chris Costello writes: >> : I'm seeing more and more of a need for a compat library for >> : Linux and GNU software in general. Adding unnecessary bloat to >> : our libc isn't necessary, in my opinion. >> >> The problem with this is that it becomes harder to build on FreeBSD >> because you have to add additional, non-standard libraries to the >> build process. > That's the problem. I honestly can't begin to think of a perfect >way of getting around Linux developers putting kludge after kludge >on top of poorly written workarounds on top of hacks that were never >really fully implemented (as far as libc goes). Put their >functions in our libc and we end up with a bigger, bloated libc. >Make a new library and cause trouble for people wanting to build >the latest greatest Linux program on FreeBSD. stpcpy() (the issue in this case) is something I've seen in compiler's C libraries since the late 80's/early 90's (if I remember correctly), if I remember correctly. Quite honestly, it's useful, and if the library mechanism/source is set up right, only affects programs that use it, and even then it's what, a dozen bytes or two (at most)? I remember writing my own version of it (before the Lattice compiler had it) in '85. It's handy and improves performance for the cases where it's used, and it's small. The only issue would be the fact that it's non-ANSI, but so are 5000 other things in the libraries (system calls, for example), and maybe that some application has it's own hard-coded version (thus someone's suggestion to use a weak symbol). IMHO. I'm not addressing the bigger issue of Linux compatibility. However, libc bloat doesn't seem to me to be a major problem - at worst a small amount of disk space, and a (very small) bit more CPU to link. -- Randell Jesup, Worldgate Communications, ex-Scala, ex-Amiga OS team ('88-94) rjesup@wgate.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message