Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2) 
Date:      Tue, 27 Apr 2021 18:30:30 -0700
From:      Ravi Pokala <rpokala@freebsd.org>
To:        Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>, Ravi Pokala <rpokala@freebsd.org>
Cc:        <src-committers@FreeBSD.org>, <dev-commits-src-all@FreeBSD.org>, <dev-commits-src-main@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: 0cd4b781a6fa - main - pw(8): use openmemstream instead of sbuf(9)
Message-ID:  <F8B0147D-189F-4145-BC24-FC4F39C02812@panasas.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210427070557.wv3lkor3tscxzdtg@aniel.nours.eu>
References:  <202104270309.13R39Lur024105@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <705D11CB-3762-4437-8825-8E3040BBAB9F@panasas.com> <20210427070557.wv3lkor3tscxzdtg@aniel.nours.eu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help 

-----Original Message-----
From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>
Date: 2021-04-27, Tuesday at 00:05
To: Ravi Pokala <rpokala@freebsd.org>
Cc: <src-committers@FreeBSD.org>, <dev-commits-src-all@FreeBSD.org>, <dev-commits-src-main@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: 0cd4b781a6fa - main - pw(8): use openmemstream instead of sbuf(9)

    On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 09:13:53PM -0700, Ravi Pokala wrote:
    > -----Original Message-----
...
    > Hi Baptiste,
    > 
    >         pw(8): use openmemstream instead of sbuf(9)
    > 
    > That's the "what", but what's the "why"?
    > 
    > Thanks,
    > 
    You are right about this. Here the why. I have been the one introducing sbug in
    pw(8) when I rewrote it, but since the beginning while I found this was better
    than the solution in place I didn't like adding another external lib just for
    that.

Fair enough.

    Short after I discovered about open_memstream(3) and figured it could fill the
    same spot here but keeping the dep only on libc.

I keep forgetting that open_memstream(3) is even a thing. `grep'ing the src tree, it looks like it's very rarely used.

    I was puzzled about pushing
    this change, and the switch to git reminded me about some uncommit patches
    sitting on my tree and I ended up pushing it.

    If people have strong opinion I can revert it back.

I can't imagine anyone having a problem with this. :-)

Thanks for explaining.

-Ravi (rpokala@)

    Things that have not been taken in account in the change, but to answer
    questions asked privately:

    - I have performed absolutely no performance benchmark, it does not matter here.

    - The size of the final binary is smaller:
      - 76k on amd64 for the new version
      - 77k for the old version

    Best regards,
    Bapt

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F8B0147D-189F-4145-BC24-FC4F39C02812>