From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 17 06:02:08 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 413E316A4CE; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 06:02:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from gw.celabo.org (gw.celabo.org [208.42.49.153]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C31C43D41; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 06:02:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nectar@celabo.org) Received: from madman.celabo.org (madman.celabo.org [10.0.1.111]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "madman.celabo.org", Issuer "celabo.org CA" (verified OK)) by gw.celabo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 985F25482B; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 08:02:02 -0600 (CST) Received: by madman.celabo.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 07E0B6D45F; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 08:02:01 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 08:02:01 -0600 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: Alfred Perlstein Message-ID: <20031217140201.GB6018@madman.celabo.org> References: <200312170256.hBH2uSOn062945@repoman.freebsd.org> <200312170254.hBH2sTJx062816@repoman.freebsd.org> <20031217132252.GA6018@madman.celabo.org> <20031217133953.GD60229@elvis.mu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031217133953.GD60229@elvis.mu.org> X-Url: http://www.celabo.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i-ja.1 cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/include fnmatch.h X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:02:08 -0000 On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 05:39:53AM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > It is still required for standards conformance. Yes, you are right. The SUSv3 `Implementation Conformance' section does not indicate that `obsolescent' features need be present, but buried in the `Rationale for Base Definitions' under `Terminology' is ``The terms "legacy" and "obsolescent" are different: a feature marked LEGACY is not recommended for new work and need not be present on an implementation (if the XSI Legacy Option Group is not supported). __A_feature_noted_as_obsolescent_is_supported_by_all_implementations__, but may be removed in a future revision; new applications should not use these features.'' (emphasis added) (quoted for the other curious) This seems to be the only place in all of SUSv3 to indicate that `obsolescent' features must be supported by a conforming implementation. I was under a different impression previously. > There may be tools out there that expect to "just work" like so > > switch (id) { > ... > case FNM_NOSYS: > str = "FNM_NOSYS"; > ... > } > > and those should "just work". The only reason I brought it up is because the absence of FNM_NOSYS on BSD for the past decade apparently hasn't been noticed until now (why now?), seeming to imply that there aren't any such applications. Cheers, -- Jacques Vidrine NTT/Verio SME FreeBSD UNIX Heimdal nectar@celabo.org jvidrine@verio.net nectar@freebsd.org nectar@kth.se