Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 01:00:56 +0200 From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl> To: Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd@gmail.com> Cc: standards@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Non-POSIX compliant setpgrp(2) Message-ID: <20100620230056.GB4116@stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikBcl13wabmT4meRxyZToGgN3uzuyCINdGtzQmA@mail.gmail.com> References: <AANLkTinSZcuXuXKCiv_gf48K7pZDdf5Pu2_Yi8U8wxMS@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikBcl13wabmT4meRxyZToGgN3uzuyCINdGtzQmA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 02:24:00AM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 2:20 AM, Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd@gmail.com> wrote: > > Looks like setpgrp was added to BASE in recent versions of the POSIX spec: > > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/functions/setpgrp.html > > The void argument format contradicts what's in BSD (and Linux), so > > it looks like POSIX isn't compliant with anyone else... > Scratch that. It's just BSD... setpgrp() is under the XSI option and usual FreeBSD policy is to prefer traditional BSD to XSI. Furthermore, the setpgrp() function is marked as obsolescent in the 2008 version of the standard (you are linking to the 2001 version). One of the reasons for this is that the semantics are poorly defined: it is unspecified whether it creates a new session or a new process group. -- Jilles Tjoelker
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100620230056.GB4116>