OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
Re: mg(1) compatibility patches

From: Theo de Raadt (deraadtcvs.openbsd.org)
Date: Fri Nov 14 2014 - 17:00:14 CST


>> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 at 9:59 PM
>> From: "Theo de Raadt" <deraadtcvs.openbsd.org>
>> To: n54gmx.com, tedutedunangst.com
>> Cc: techopenbsd.org
>> Subject: Re: mg(1) compatibility patches
>>
>> >> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 at 9:10 PM
>> >> From: "Ted Unangst" <tedutedunangst.com>
>> >> To: "Kamil Rytarowski" <n54gmx.com>
>> >> Cc: techopenbsd.org
>> >> Subject: Re: mg(1) comaptibility patches
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 20:29, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> >> > 0001-Define-strtonum-3-for-the-NetBSD-target.patch
>> >>
>> >> I don't like this at all. The reason we put strtonum in libc is
>> >> precisely not to have multiple copies of it floating around the tree.
>> >> Uncompiled copies are still clutter.
>> >>
>> >> This may be odd for a BSD system, but perhaps the pkgsrc version could
>> >> link against libbsd?
>> >>
>> >
>> >Actually not as libbsd is in reality GNU/Linux-oriented.
>> >
>> >Other solution is to go backward for strtol(3)-like functions,
>> >what do you think?
>>
>>
>> Solution to what problem?
>>
>>
>
>Hello Theo,
>
>mg(1) is maintained in OpenBSD's CVS tree, therefore OpenBSD is upstream.
>
>In downstream (except FreeBSD and libbsd consumers) there is missing
>strtonum(3). To enhance mg(1) and catch its bugs in general I need to
>start with improvement of its portability to other unsupported systems
>(as I'm a consumer of few pkgsrc platforms).
>
>Please point appropriate way to do it, preferably without floating
>patches around.

The problem you are trying to define is that we (OpenBSD) are supposed
to have a sense of responsibility to make a portable version of mg.

Sorry, but I cannot find any file or email where that intent was
declared in the past.

I think you are on your own.